neither industry nor enterprise will thrive except
under the stimulus of self-interest, we may admire
the confidence which in another age expected every
man to prefer the advantage of the community to his
own. All land was held upon a strictly military
principle. It was the representative of authority,
and the holder or the owner took rank in the army
of the State according to the nature of his connection
with it. It was first broadly divided among the
great nobility holding immediately under the crown,
who, above and beyond the ownership of their private
estates, were the Lords of the Fee throughout their
presidency, and possessed in right of it the services
of knights and gentlemen who held their manors under
them, and who followed their standard in war.
Under the lords of manors, again, small freeholds and
copyholds were held of various extent, often forty
shilling and twenty shilling value, tenanted by peasant
occupiers, who thus, on their own land, lived as free
Englishmen, maintaining by their own free labour themselves
and their families. There was thus a descending
scale of owners, each of whom possessed his separate
right, which the law guarded and none might violate;
yet no one of whom, again, was independent of an authority
higher than himself; and the entire body of the English
free possessors of the soil was interpenetrated by
a coherent organisation which converted them into a
perpetually subsisting army of soldiers. The extent
of land which was held by the petty freeholders was
very large, and the possession of it was jealously
treasured; the private estates of the nobles and gentlemen
were either cultivated by their own servants, or let
out, as at present, to free tenants; or (in earlier
times) were occupied by villains, a class who, without
being bondmen, were expected to furnish further services
than those of the field, services which were limited
by the law, and recognised by an outward ceremony,
a solemn oath and promise from the villain to his lord.
Villanage, in the reign of Henry VIII., had practically
ceased. The name of it last appears upon the
statute book in the early years of the reign of Richard
II., when the disputes between villains and their liege
lords on their relative rights had furnished matter
for cumbrous lawsuits, and by general consent the
relation had merged of itself into a more liberal form.
Thus serfdom had merged or was rapidly merging into
free servitude; but it did not so merge that labouring
men, if they pleased, were allowed to live in idleness.
Every man was regimented somewhere; and although the
peasantry, when at full age, were allowed, under restrictions,
their own choice of masters, yet the restrictions
both on masters and servants were so severe as to
prevent either from taking advantage of the necessities
of the other, or from terminating through caprice
or levity, or for any insufficient reason, a connection
presumed to be permanent.[9]
Through all these arrangements a single aim is visible, that every man in England should have his definite place and definite duty assigned to him, and that no human being should be at liberty to lead at his own pleasure an unaccountable existence. The discipline of an army was transferred to the details of social life, and it issued in a chivalrous perception of the meaning of the word duty, and in the old characteristic spirit of English loyalty.


