TheServilePeasantryofManorialRecordsItwouldbeaswrongtorestrictthestudyofvillainagetolegaldocumentsastodisregardthem。Thejurisprudenceandpracticeoftheking’scourtspresentaone-sided，thoughaveryimportantviewofthesubject，butitmustbesupplementedandverifiedbyaninvestigationofmanorialrecords。Withoneclassofsuchdocumentswehavehadalreadytodeal，namelywiththerollsofmanorialcourts，whichformasitwerethestepping-stonebetweenlocalarrangementsandthegeneraltheoriesofCommonLaw。So-calledmanorial’extents’androyalinquisitionsbasedonthemleadusonestepfurther；theywereintendedtodescribethematter-of-factconditionsofactuallife，thedistributionofholdings，theamountandnatureofservices，thepersonaldivisionsofthepeasantry，theirevidenceisnotopentotheobjectionofhavingbeenartificiallytreatedforlegalpurposes。Treatisesonfarmingandinstructionstomanorialofficersreflecttheeconomicsideofthesystem，andanenormousnumberofaccountsofexpenditureandreceiptswouldenablethemodernsearcher，ifsominded，toenterevenintothedetailofagriculturalmanagement。1*Weneednotundertakethislastinquiry，butsomecomparisonbetweentheviewsoflawyersandtheactualfactsofmanorialadministrationmustbeattempted。WritersonCommonLawinviteonetothetaskbyrecognisingagreatvarietyoflocalcustoms；Bracton，forinstance，mentioningtwonotabledeviationsfromgeneralrulesinthedepartmentoflawunderdiscussion。InCornwallthechildrenofavillainandofafreewomanwerenotallunfree，butsomefollowedthefatherandothersthemother。2*InHerefordshirethemasterwasnotboundtoproducehisserfstoanswercriminalcharges。3*IfsuchcustomsweresufficientlystrongtocounteracttheinfluenceofgeneralrulesofCommonLaw，thevitalityoflocaldistinctionswasevenmorefeltinthosecaseswheretheyhadnorulestobreakthrough，Itmaybeevenaskedattheveryoutsetoftheinquirywhetherthereisnotadangerofourbeingdistractedbyendlessdetails。Ihopethatthefollowingpageswillshowhowthevarietiesnaturallyfallintocertainclassesandconvergetowardsafewdefinitepositions，whichappearthemoreimportantastheywerenotproducedbyartificialarrangementfromabove。Wemustbecarefulhowever，anddistinguishbetweenisolatedfactsandwidely-spreadconditions。Anotherpossibleobjectiontothemethodofourstudymaybealsonoticedhere，asitisconnectedwiththesamedifficulty。Supposewegetinonecasetheexplanationofacustomorinstitutionwhichrecursinmanyothercases；areweentitledtogeneraliseourexplanation？Thisseemsmethodicallysoundaslongasthecontrarycannotbeestablished，fortheplainreasonthatthevarietyoflocalfactsisavarietyofcombinationsandofeffects，notofconstitutiveelementsandofcauses。Theagentsofdevelopmentarenotmany，thoughtheirjointworkshadesoffintoagreatnumberofvariations。Wemaybeprettysurethataresultrepeatedseveraltimeshasbeeneffectedbythesamefactorsinthesameway；andifinsomeinstancesthesefactorsappearmanifestly，thereiseveryreasontosupposethemtohaveexistedinallthecases。Suchreflectionsareneverconvincingbythemselves，however，andthebestthingtotestthemwillbetoproceedfromthesebroadstatementstoaninquiryintotheparticularsofthecase。
Thestudyofmanorialevidencemuststartfromadiscussionastoterminology。Thenamesofthepeasantrywillshowthenaturalsubdivisionsoftheclass。Ifwelookonlytotheunfreevillagers，weshallnoticethatallthevarietiesofdenominationcaneasilybearrangedintofourclasses：oneoftheseclasseshasinviewsocialstanding，anothereconomiccondition，athirdstartsfromadifferenceofservices，andafourthfromadifferenceofholdings。Thelinemaynotbedrawnsharplybetweentheseveraldivisions，butthegeneralcontrastcannotbemistaken。
Thetermofmostcommonoccurrenceis，ofcourse，villanus。
Althoughitsetymologypointsprimarilytotheplaceofdwelling，andindirectlytospecificoccupations，itischieflyusedduringthefeudalperiodtodenoteservitude。Ittakesinboththemanwhoispersonallyunfreeandstandsincompletesubjectiontothelord，andthefreepersonsettledonservileland。BothclassesmentionedanddistinguishedbyBractonarecoveredbyit。Thecommonoppositionisbetweenvillanusandliberetenens，notbetweenvillanusandliberhomo。Itisnotdifficulttoexplainsuchaphraseologyinbookscompiledeitherintheimmediateinterestofthelordsorundertheirindirectinfluence，butitmusthavenecessarilyledtoencroachmentsanddisputes：ithasevenbecomeasnareforlaterinvestigators，whohavesometimesbeenledtoconsiderasonecompactmassapopulationconsistingoftwodifferentclasses，eachwithaseparatehistoryofitsown。TheLatin’rusticus’isappliedinthesamegeneralway。ltislesstechnicalhowever，andoccurschieflyinannalsanDotherliteraryproductions，forwhichitwasbettersuitedbyitsclassicalDerivation。Butwhenitisusedinoppositiontootherterms，itstandsexactlyasvillanus。thatistosay，itiscontrastedwithliberetenens。4*
Thefundamentaldistinctionofpersonalstatushasleftsometracesinterminology。TheHundredRolls，especiallytheWarwickshireone，5*mentionserviveryoften。Sometimesthewordisusedexactlyasvillanuswouldbe。6*Tenereinservituteandtenereinvillenagioareequivalent。7*Butotherinstancesshowthatservushasalsoaspecialmeaning。Caseswhereitoccursinan’extent’immediatelyaftervillanus，andpossiblyinoppositiontoit，arenotdecisive。8*Theymaybeexplainedbythefactthatthepersonsengagedindrawingupacustumal，jotteddowndenominationsofthepeasantrywithoutcomparingthemcarefullywithwhatpreceded。Amarginalnoteserviwouldnotbenecessarilyopposedtoavillanifollowingit；