s A43: 1 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 3 1924 085 787 830 AGRICULTURE MIDDLE! AGES Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924085787830 ALBERT R. MANIM LIBRARY AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY AGRICULTUEE IN THE MIDDLE AGES. BY WILLIAM F. ALLEN, A. M., Frofessor of Latin and History^ VnlversUi/ of Wisconsin. When I first received an invitation to read a paper at this meet- ing, I hesitated, not seeing what I could say that would be of in- terest or profit to you. I was, to be sure, brought ud in a farming community, and learned all the routine of farm operations in my youth by such constant practice as a boy in a New England country town is pretty sure to get. Neither have I ever lost my fondness for out-of-door employments, and never feel more contented than when I am at work among my vines and flower-beds. Neverthe- less I did not feel that I had any experience — and I certainly had no scientific knowledge — that would qualify me to instruct or even to give suggestions upon any point of husbandry to persons whose business this is. It occurred to me, however, that my studies had led me inci- dentally to take some note of the history of agriculture, both in an- cient and modern times, and that perhaps I could find something in this field which, if not directly instructive, yet might at any rate possess some interest, in the way of showing the contrast between present and former modes of cultivation. I am far from feeling competent to relate the history of agriculture; an imperfect sketch of its condition in England, five hundred years ago, is all that I shall attempt. It should be observed in general, that when we speak of the pro- gress of agriculture during the five hundred years that have elapsed since the period which I am about to describe, the progress must be understood to consist rather in improved methods and a greater variety of crops, than in care and thoroughness of cultivation. The English estates in the fourteenth century were devoted to the pro- 2 duction of a very few crops, of a quality no doubt far inferior to those of the present day, with clumsy and inefficient tools, by un- skillful processes, and with no basis of scientific knowledge; but assuming all these deficiencies in matters of detail, the cultivation was as a whole careful and systematic. They made the most of what knowledge and facilities they had. It would probably be safe to S!iy that at the present day, with all the unqestioned advance in processes and materials, there is more superficial and slip-shod farming than there was five hundred years ago. Our opportunities are greater, and we get better results on the average; but our bet- ter results are perhaps duo to our superior opportunities, more than to the use we make of them. I have said that ihe progress of agriculture in modern times has consisted mainly in improved processes and greater variety of crops. The first point of inquiry is therefore, what crops were cultivated, and for what object. Agricultural operations are designed either to supply the immediate wants of men, in the production of food; or to provide materials for manufactures; or, again, either of these classes of products may be exported to foreign countries in ex- change for other commodities. The Wisconsin farmer produces wheat for immediate consumption; wool for manufacturing into cloth; and both wheat and wool for export. Now with these last two objects the medieval farmer had little to do; neither man ufactures nor commerce existed on a very large scale. Every- country was in the main self-supporting; that is, provided by its own production for its own wants. And what is true of the country is also true in a degree of every estate. The estates or manors were large, embracing generally an entire township; and each estate produced corn and meat for its own needs, brewed its own beer from its own barley, and wore garments made by its own women from the fleeces of its own sheep, purchasing whatever foreign articles it required for its surplus. Small communities like these, which bad this habit of depending almost exclusively upon their own productions, with no large and constant channels of exchange, and no facilities for quickly meet- ing sudden and unexpected demands, were liable to great fluctua. tions in the value of their products, and to real suffering from defi- cient crops. Famines were frequent in those days, just as they are jiow in the remote parts of the East. In the five years from 1316 to 1330, -wheat ranged from 4^ to IG shillings a quarter (of eight bushels). Manufactures, as a distinct branch of industry, hardly existed at this time, except in some parts of the Continent. And for the pur- pose of home manufacture, the products required were few and simple. I have. said that the estates were large, containing in gen- eral a whole township; but this estate, or manor, contained a mul- titude of agricultural tenants of various grades, and a village, with its laborers and artisans, sufficient for all the simple requirements of village life. The carpenter and wheelwright were supplied with timber from the wocds of the manor; the herds of cattle furnished leather, the flocks of sheep furnished wool; iron alone had to be purchased from outside. And there was scarcely any other material for manufacture needed; wool was the almost exclusive wearing material, although for other purposes, coarse cloths were made of hemp, and linen was always more or less in use, although not very generally until the fourteenth century. There was likewise some production of dye-stuifs. Neither did commerce make any large demands upon medieval agriculture. There was but one commodity of English production which was exported to any extent, and that was wool. England was at this period the great wool-producing country of northern Europe, its moist and equable climate peculiarly adapting It to grazing. This was exported chiefly to Flanders, which was the principal seat of manufacturing industry; but in the course of the fourteenth , century, numbers of Flemings — driven away by the disorders and misgovernment of their native land, and perhaps partly by the inundations upon their coast, and attracted by the prosperity and freedom of England — settled in the eastern coun- ties, and established woolen manufactories there — the commence- ment of the manufacturing industry which has raised England to its present wealth and power. Wool, therefore, was the one great staple of England, whether for manufacture or for export; for home-consumption too, so far as clothing is concerned. The raising of sheep, which had always been an important branch of industry, assumed large dimensions to- ward the close of the Middle Ages, and even encroached greatly up- on operations which were more strictly agricultural in their nature. Neat cattle were also produced, and, for purposes of food, large quantities of swine — always the principal animal food in rural communities. The great oak and beach forests of England afforded sustenance for great herds of these. Their capabilities were carefully examined and recorded, and in every manor the woods are given as of fifty or a hundred or five hundred swine. The cattle of all kinds were small; the average weight of oxen purchased for the royal navy, in 1547, was 430 pounds; and this is no doubt about the average of the earlier centuries. The weight of a fleece of wool was rarely over ten pounds. The dairy was also an iniportant branch of industry, both for cheese and butter. It is a curious fact that butter, usually sold by the gallon, was con- siderably cheaper than lard and other animal fats, so much so, as to be used for greasing wheels and similar purposes. The cause of this relative cheapuess must have been that the cattle were so small and ill-kept that they could not supply sufficient fat even for the needs of the farm. The common beverages were cider — proving a considerable de- gree of attention paid to the orchard — and beer, which, as hops were not cultivated until a later period, must have been thin and quickly soared. One is surprised to find, not only in England, but in various parts of the continent in nearly the same latitude, frequent mention made of vineyards, and the production of wine in districts where now grapes will hardly grow. This appears to have been the result of a desperate effort to overcome the obstacles of nature, and make English soil yield French products; for there is no evidence that the seasons have become more severe since that time. I find it mentioned, for example, that in the winter of 1363-4, the most intense cold continued from December 7 to March 19; and even in the south of France wine is said to have frozen upon the table before it could Le drunk — a statement which I for one will never believe. No doubt the " vineyards " in England at this period grew in great part out of the difficulty of transportation, and the meagerness of international trade, being merely designed to furnish wine for the necessary services of the church. It must be observed, however, that the price of the native wine does not indicate a quality so very inferior to the imported. Before the introduction of cane sugar, honey was an important and valuable product. It was not only the only sweetening mater- ial used in antiquity and the Middle Ages, but out of it was made a favorite drink, mead. Bee-tending was, therefore, a considerable branch of rural economy, and not only for the honey, but also for the wax. Candles were almost exclusively employed for artificial light; and while the poorer classes made use of tallow the richer classes had nothing but wax — sperm came in with the whale fish- eries of modern times, and stearine and similar materials arc purely the outgrowth of modern manufactures. Moreover, as in the case of wine, wax candles were essential for the services of the church — another reason for the great attention given to bees. None of the branches of industry which I have mentioned — nei- ther cattle nor bees, nor the dairy — come very directly into the field of agriculture ia the strict sense of the word; that is, the til- ling of the soil. When we turn to this, bearing in mind that we have under consideration a commodity which produces neither for manufacture nor commerce, but simply to supply its own wants, we are still struck by the meagreness of the objects of cultivation. It was the cereals and scarcely anything else; no maize or buckwheat, no roots, clover or artificial grasses (these came in in the seventeenth century), scarcely any fruits but apples and pears, although I find plums and cherries also mentioned. First, a few words upon the crops produced for the food of ani- mals. The cattle grazed for the most part upon the natural pas- tures and the stubble, and this pasturage was, like everything else in medieval husbandry, managed and superintended with great care and precision. The number of animals which each person was en- titled to keep upon the common pasture and the stubble was reg- ulated generally in accordance with his share in the arable land; tenure of arable land carried with it, as a general thing, a specific and definite right of common. A common rule was to allow each person to pasture as many animals as he had means to keep over winter. The preservation of the common for pasturage was an im- portant matter, and I find it distinctly provided, in a document de- fining the rights of common, that no tree shall be planted upon the land, unless to take the place of one which should perish by decay. After the crops were harvested, the fences were removed and the stubble thrown open to pasture. In regard to this, I find a by-law laid down in one manor, for which I cannot understand the reason, that from Ascension Day (May 5th) to Christmas, no mares with foals or cows with calves should feed upon these stubbles, under the penalty of a fine. In the mild winters of Europe, especially in Southern England, the pasturage is hardly suspended altogether any part of the win- ter; nevertheless, there must be more or less stall-feeding at this season, even here, and the hay crop was an important one. As I have already said, there was no clover or artificial grass; all the more valuable were the natural meadows which, in the descriptions of estates, are always specified with great exactness, and the services in harvesting which are carefully enumerated. Just so it was in the early settlement of New England; the broad meadows, with their coarse wild grass, furnished the only supply of winter food for cattle, and were an essential part of every farm. Besides this, peas, beans and vetches were largely cultivated in the middle ages for the food of cattle and horses. Let us pass now to the principal crop, the cereals; that which formed almost the sole object of the purely agricultural operations. No doubt the implements were rude and clumsy, and the processes unscientific; nevertheless these were not at the lowest stage. The English plough, in the middle ages, to judge from contemporary pictures, was a heavy, two-handled article, often with a very large wheel, or pair of wheels, to help support and guide it. The ma- nuring of the land was probably not very thorough or systematic, al- though both marl and dung are mentioned, and directions are given that the manure be covered, so that its qualities be not washed away in the rain. It was common to manure land by penning the sheep upon it; and it was a usual prerogative of feudal lords to re- quire their serfs to keep their sheep in folds upon the lord's land, (the so-called jus foldxB). As to the use of dung and marl, I find in a writer of the day, some elaborate and mysterious rules, which I find it very hard to comprehend, and those which I can under- stand I am informed are mostly nonsense. There was a regular system of fallows, and in connection with it a rude rotation of crops, but not, it may be supposed, in any sense a scientific rotation, designed to recuperate the powers of the land by the qualities of different crops. It was only that certain of the cereals were best sown in the fall, and others in the spring; and it was more convenient to sow the spring corn in the field used the previous year for the winter crop, than to continue each crop upon the same land. There were various systems of rotation in use, but far the most common was that known as the " Three Field System," in which the arable lands were divided into three large fields, for the purpose of a triennial rotation. In the so-called " tenement lands," which were occupied and cultivated by the peasants for themselves, but as tenants of the lord of the manor, each peasant had a strip in each of these fi<»lds — a long, narrow strip, such as are seen everywhere on the continent of Europe, and in this coun- try in the French settlements along the St. Lawrence. Each peas- ant had his strip by himself, separated from that of his neighbor by a narrow baulk of turf; but he must cultivate it as the rest did — in the Winter field he must put in winter corn, in the Lent field sum- mer corn, and the fallow field must lie Fallow like that of his neigh- bors. For, as I have said, after the crop was gathered, the fences were removed and the cattle admitted into the fields to feed upon the stubble and the baulks of turf; of course no one person could be allowed to interfere with the fencing and the pasturage of the community. Fences were therefore, at this time, for the most part, temporary rail fences, put up when the crop was planted, and re- moved when it was harvested, as is the case in parts of the south. The hedge-rows, which are so characteristic a feature of England at the present day, did not come into general use until towards the close of the middle age. I find, however, in the fourteenth centu- ry, directions given in regard to hedges, that they should be of wil- low or white thorn — showing that they were not uncommon as early as this. We have, therefore, as a general rule, a triennial rotation of crops, consisting, for the first year, of winter grain (wheat or rye), the next year of summer grain (oats or barley), while ifche third year the land lay fallow. It must be understood that the year began at Michaelmas (Sept. 29), which appears to have been the regular term for all agricultural operations, as it still is, I believe, in England. The year began at once, then, with putting in the seed for the winter crop; for this the ground had been prepared by a year of fallow, and by a three-fold plowing. The first plowing, called the "plowing of the fallow" (warectatio), was regularly in April " when the ground is broken " {cum terra fregerit), meaning, I suppose, when it is dry enough to crumble and not clog the plow. Then after midsummer came the " stirring" (rehinatio), as it is called, " when the seeds have sprung up after the fallow plowing," {cum terra pullulaverit post tcarec- tum.) This, it is said, should not be too deep — only enough to de- stroj' the weeds. In the autumn manure is spread upon the land, and it is plowed a third time for the crop — this time two fingers'- breadths deeper, with broad and close furrows. Without being ac- quainted with the laws of chemistry, these men knew by experience that the ground, when lying fallow and open, absorbed valuable in- gredients from the rain and the air. After the winter crop was harvested, the land was thrown open for grazing, until the next crop was to be put in. This stubble pas- ture amounted to more than might seem, for to say nothing of the green baulks of turf, which in one estate were estimated to amount to eighty asres, it was the custom, in reaping the grain, only to clip off the ears, leaving the straw standing; then they cut whatever straw was needed for thatching and other purposes, and the cattle were turned into the field to feed upon the remainder. The next spring the summer crop was sown, and again, after this was harvested, the cattle were allowed to pasture upon the stubble un- til the following spring, when the plowing of the fallow commenced the preparation of the ground for the winter crop. The plowing was usually done with oxen, commonly eight to a team. Horses were used, but their labor was more expensive; moreover, with the imperfect drainage of the time, the labor of horses was not considered so well suited to heavy, muddy land. A writer of the fourteenth century* recommends using a pair of horses ■with a team of oxen, as being quite as efficient except in rocky land, and a good deal more economical. The yield was small. This same writer speaks of a threefold yield, as something unusual, but as certainly not remunerative. Allowing to the acre two bushels of seed, at 13d., and reckoning the three plowings at 18d., the harrowing at Id., weeding at Iqr., reaping at 5d., and teaming at Id., a yield of six bushels, he says, will be a dead loss of 3qr., unless some profit can be made out of the straw. This statement is corroborated by the statistics collect- ed by Prof. Rogers, in his History of Agriculture and Prices. f For seed, two bushels of wheat and rye go to the acre; four of barley and oats; and the yield ranged from twice to eight times the seed, ♦Fleta, Book II, 'i3, 3. t Vol. I, p. 50. that is from four to sixteen bushels of wheat; the other cropb at about the same proportion. I have spoken' chiefly of agriculture in England, that being the country in regard to which we have the best information. It would appear that in France and Germany agricultural science was some- what less advanced; in the south of Europe it was in a muph higher condition, as might be expected from the greater advancement of these nations in the other departments of civilization. We find in Italy during the Middle Ages agricultural improvements which in the more northern countries belong only to modern times. The great obstacles to agricultural progress were two: The sim- plicity of medieval life, which was satisfied with a few gross pro- ducts, and the artificial restrictions of society which hampered all individuality and enterprise. The first of these obstacles was removed by the rapid growth of the cities in population, wealth and power, a growth which belongs mainly to the fourteenth century. The rich burghers — plebeians as they were —were not satisfied with the coarse, unvaried fare of a baron's table, nor with the homespun garments of wool and hemp. Commerce began to supply them abundantly with the wines, silks and spices ot the South and East, and home productions must like- wise be more delicate and varied. The extravagance and luxury which characterized the closing years of the Middle Ages, had at least this good result, that they gave a powerful stimulus to every branch of production. From this new city life begins the first de- cisive progress in agriculture. The second obstacle was also removed, but more slowly. With the breaking up of feudalism, serfdom — its natural companion — must perish too; but the process was a slow one, and in many parts of Europe serfdom, instead of being mitigated with the new life of modern times, was made more harsh and burdensome. Still slower to disappear was the control over modes of cultivation exer- cised by the communities, with their constrained cultivation in common. In some parts of western Europe these usages have not even yet disappeared; in eastern Europe they are in full operation to this day. I have shown, I think, that, with all its short-comings, medieval agriculture was not at so very low a stage. Unscientific as it was, it was nevertheless careful and faithful; no one can look over the 10 tegisters and rent rolls of the English manors of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, without being convinced that their proprie- tors were not altogether the harsh tyrants, nor the serfs the ab- ject wretches which we are wont to imagine. Diiferent countries differed much from one another, and nowhere were the poor safe from violence and insolence; for some countries and some periods the blackest colors are none too dark to describe the abuses of feu- dalism. But England — with the rarest exceptions — was at all times a land of law; the serf was a freeman towards all but his lord, and even towards his lord he had legal rights which he could en- force in the courts. In truth, the peasantry of Europe, at least of France and Eng- land, appears to have been, on the whole, better oif at the close of the thirteenth century than for many generations after. The gross- ness and violence of the feudal times were past; society was becom- ing settled and orderly; the bonds of serfdom were relaxed, and free institutions were rapidly springing up; England was gov- erned by an able, vigorous, constitutional king (Edward ]); com- merce and manufactures were just entering upon that career which has given such marvelous results in our day. The unjust and bloody international wars of the fourteenth century, the relent- less civil wars which accompanied them, the overthrow of free insti- tutions in the fifteenth century, the religious wars and persecutions of the sixteenth century, the wholesale depreciations of the cur- rency, by which the kings plundered their subjects, the building up of enormous estates in England, with the unwise poor laws, which gave the finishing stroke to the ruin of the peasantry; in France the crushing of all freedom and individuality, in Germany the surrendering of all povver into the hands of a multitude of petty princes — all these things resulted in an almost steady depression of the peasantry, both in intelligence and prosperity, until very nearly our own day. We are in fact inclined to boast overmuch of the enlightenment of the nineteenth century. I am far from being disposed to ques- tion this enlightenment, or the progress, not only ia material arts and physical science, bat in thought and civilization. But we should not forget that the European peasantry were the last to re- ceive their share of the gains; and on the other hand it is well for us not to think more highly of ourselves than we ought to think, o 11 to lancy that our fathers, five hundred years ago, lived like the beasts of the field. Hard as vyas theii lot, even the serfs of that period lived in a condition of comfort, on the whole, greater than that of their descendants of the last century. And the free agri- cultural laborers, vrho lived upon their daily earnings, had a better prospect before them than those of the present day; it was easier for them to lay up money and become the owners of land, and thus rise in the social scale. It is a difficult thing to compare the condition of people at wide- ly distant periods of time. The standard of living changes — the poorest of us demand comforts now which the richest could not afford 500 years ago. The objects of consumption change — cotton, coifee, potatoes, with numerous other indispensables of the present day, were then utterly unknown. The value of money changes, — the English shilling of 1300 had three times the amount of silver in it that the present one has; and, what is of still more import- ance, silver has fallen enormously in value, through the discovery of the American mines. The quality of things changes — how can we compare the coarse wool, mixed with hair, of the fourteenth century, with the fine merino which we wear? Add to this that the laborers of the middle age, from their relation to the manor, en- joyed a great many perquisites in the way of wood, pasture, rent, extra food, etc. — just like the freed slaves upon the southern plan- tations, — which are hard to take into account with any definite- ness, and which yet complicate the account materially. Neverthe- less, a few statistics, in comparison of the mode of life at the two periods, may be of interest, if we are careful to bear in mind that the comparison is only approximately accurate. I take the year 1300, because it was before any depreciation of the currency, and before the social revolution caused by the great plague of 1348. A day laborer at the close of the thirteenth century received on an average about 3d* a day, which in American silver, is equal to about 18c. ; the laborer of the present day in England receives, 1 believe, on an average about 3s. a day, equal to 50c. of our money, nearly three times the amount of the earlier wages. Taking, now, a few of the principal objects of consumption, we find that the bushel of wheat then averaged about lid. (=47c.); at the present day it is * The modern prices here piv