Thedisruptionofpoliticalunityatthetimeofthegreatcivilwar，andthesystematicresumptionofroyalrightsbyHenryII，musthaveledtoasettlementwhichimpairedthesocialstandingofthevillaininthesenseoffeudallaw。TheimmediateconnexionbetweenthelowerclassandtheroyalpowercouldnotbekeptupduringthetroubledreignofStephen，whenEnglandallbutlapsedintothepoliticaldismembermentoftheneighbouringcontinentalstates。GovernmentandlawwererestoredbyHenryII，buthehadtosetalimittohissphereofactioninorderthatwithinthatspherehemightactefficiently。Theverygrowthofthegreatsystemofroyalwritsnecessitatedthedrawingasharplinebetweenthepeopleadmittedtousethemandthoseexcludedfromthisbenefit。Onepartoftherevolutioneffectedbythedevelopmentofroyaljurisdictionisverynoticeableinourdocuments：thestrugglebetweenkingandmagnatesastotherightofjudgingfreeholdershasleftmanytraces，ofwhichthehistoryofthe’brevequodvocaturpraecipe’isperhapsthemostremarkable。Butthevictoriousprogressofroyaljurisdictioninregardtofreeholderswascounter-balancedbyanallbutcompletesurrenderofitinregardtovillains。Thecelebratedtit。29ofWilliamtheConqueror’slawsprovidingthatthecultivatorsofthelandarenottobesubjectedtonewexactions，hadlostitssenseinthereignofHenryII，andsosoonasitwassettledthatoneclassoftenantswastobeprotected，whileanotherwastobeunprotectedintheking’scourt，thelawyerssetthemselvesthinkingovertheproblemofadefiniteandplaindivisionofclasses。Theirworkinthisdirectionbearsallthemarksofafreshdeparture。Theyarewaveringbetweentheformalandthematerialtest：insteadofsettingupatoncetheconvenientdoctrinethatvillainageisprovedbystock，andthatinregardtoserviceandtenurethequestionisdecidedbytheircertaintyoruncertainty，theytryforalongtimetoshapeconclusiverulesastothekindofservicesandincidentswhichimplyvillainage，andforatimedistinctionbetweenrurallabourandrentbecomesespeciallyimportant。
Onthewhole，Ithinkthatananalysisofthelegalandmanorialevidencebelongingtothefeudalageleadsforciblytotheconclusionthatthegeneralclassificationofsocietyunderthetwoheadsoffreeholdersandvillainsisanartificialandalateone。Anumberofimportantgroupsappearbetweenthetwo
andifwetrytoreducethemtosomeunity，wemaysaythatathirdclassisformedbycustomaryfreeholders。Anotherwayofstatingthesamethingwouldbetosay，thatthefeudalnotionofafreeholdfromwhichthemodernnotionhasdevelopedmustbesupplementedfromthepointofviewofthehistorianbyamoreancientformwhichishidden，asitwere，insidetheclassdistinctionofvillainage。Bythesideofthefreeholderrecognisedbylaterlawtherestandsthevillainasacustomaryfreeholderwhohaslostlegalprotection。Idonotthinkthattheproblemsresultingfromtheambiguouspositionofthefeudalvillaincanbesolvedbetterthanonthesuppositionofthis’thirdestate。’
Chandler，CourtRollsofGreatCressingham，p。14：’20solididetotoHomagioquiarecusaveruntprepararefenumdomini。DebitumponaturinrespectumusqueproximamcuriametintereascrutaturleDomesday。’Amanorialextentisevidentlymeant。Comp。
DomesdayofSt。Paul’s。