INTRODUCTION. the year the text. THIS Volume contains reports of Easter, Trinity, and Reports of Michaelmas Terms in the nineteenth year of the reign 19 Edward fo Edward III., which have never before been printed. III. not previously The manuscripts which have been used to establish printed. the text are the Lincoln's Inn MS., the Harleian MS. The No. 741 in the British Museum; and the two MSS. in manuscripts the University Library at Cambridge numbered Hh. 2. used to 3 and Hh. 2. 4. The three first have already been establish described in the Introductions to previous volumes of Year Books. The Cambridge MS. Hh. 2. 4 (or 1632), has also been already mentioned,1 but may require some further notice in relation to the reports now published. Of Easter Term it contains only the last seven cases (Nos. 40-46 as printed below). It has a complete set of reports of Trinity Term. The heading of Michaelmas Term has originally been "De Termino Michaelis anno Regni Regis Edwardi tertii a Conquestu vicesimo "nono," but the word "decimo" has been afterwards substituted for "vicesimo." The reports really are of Michaelmas Term in the nineteenth year of the reign, but they are incomplete, as they extend only to the case No. 60 which is on fo. 252, b. of the MS. At some time, however, other reports must have followed, as there is a catch-word at the foot of the folio relating to the case No. 61 as found in other manuscripts. Folio 253 begins with reports of Michaelmas Term 23 Edward III. The writing is in a hand of the fourteenth century, and the manuscript is consequently of value as being approximately contemporary with the reports themselves. 1 See Y.B., Mich. 13-Hil. 14 Edw. III., Introd. pp. xxi-xxiv, and Y.B. Hil.-Trin., 17 Edw. III,, Introd. pp. xxxi xxxii. The corre- The reports found in the manuscripts have, as usual, sponding records been compared with the corresponding records. The compared. system on which the comparison has been made, the manner in which the records have been used when found, and the difficulties attending the search have been explained in the volume of Year Books (Rolls edition) containing the reports of Easter and Trinity Terms 18 Edward III.1 to Fitz References As in all previous volumes edited by me, every case herbert's which occurs in Fitzherbert's Abridgment has been Abridg- traced, and noted, as well as those which are to be the Liber found in the Liber Assisarum. ment, and Assisarum. Matters illustra ting the The reports of the three terms now published, with the associated records, are, perhaps, more than usually social rich in matters illustrating the every-day life of the history of the period. people. We obtain glimpses of the Knights Hospitallers in their Commanderies, where they had been settled after the Knights Templars had been suppressed, and of the customs of the manor of Temple Combe.2 We find a parson letting his church to farm, with all its appurtenances, rights, and obventions, for a term of three years, at a rent of ten pounds per annum. We are told of a man who was indicted in the King's Bench for threatening and striking jurors, and who there had sentence that his right hand should be struck off, and that his lands and chattels should be forfeited.4 A Latin text of the 3 We are also introduced to a Latin version of the Statute of eleventh chapter of the Statute of Gloucester, for Gloucester, the protection of tenants for years, which (notwithstanding the clerical error of admittere for amittere) appears to be, on the whole, somewhat better than that which is given by Fleta.“ c. 11. 1 Introd. pp. xviii-xxxiv. 2 Below, pp. 352–357. 8 Below, pp. 402-406; 405, note 2. 4 Below, p. 452. 5 Below, p. 441, note 1. 6 Fleta (1685), p. 120. The statute appears in French both in the Statutes at Large and in the Statutes of the Realm, 2 some Villenage: use of the cattle words and The subject of villenage again comes into prominence. It again clearly appears that any which a villein might possess were regarded as being nativus the lord's, from a strictly legal point of view, and that villanus. to take them was to levy a good distress on the lord.1 There is an example of a writ of Naifty by which a lord attempted to recover possession of two villeins. This could be done only when the villein had run away from his lord's land, and it was a part of the form of the writ that he had to be described as "nativum "et fugitivum,”—always, be it observed, as "fugitivum, and always not as "villanum" but as "nativum." It is, perhaps, possible by closely marking the use of the word “nativus" in the writ of Naifty and elsewhere, and of the word "villanus," where it occurs, to ascertain in what respects they differed. " the writ of In the report the French word used to express the The lord's villein who had fled is "neif" (in the masculine), French nativus (or and the land from which he had fled as being the neiƒ) in lord's "neif terre." The word "villeyn." is used only Naifty. once in relation to the "villein issues" of which the lord was alleged to have been seised. It is clear, however, that villein issues are those which are extracted from a "nativus or "neif," and it would seem that for a moment the reporter lapsed from that extreme accuracy with which he began when he made the "nativus" uniformly "neif." Colloquially a male "neif" was commonly called "villein" in French. villanus permittat The form of the writ which one lord brought against The another in relation to villeins and suit to a mill was in the writ quod permittat villanos suos facere sectam ad molen- of Quod “dinum suum.' The word used here is always “villanos” facere and never 66 nativos." It seems, therefore, certain that sectam. when the words were used in a strictly legal and not merely colloquial manner, there was some well recognised distinction between them. What was it? 1 Mich., 19 Edw. III., No. 79 (below, pp. 472-478). 2 Easter, 19 Edw. III., No. 40 (below, pp. 110-112). The nativus always of unfree condition, the villanus possibly not. The nativus in Suit to a mill was a service which did not necessarily indicate that the person performing it was of villein condition. In addition to the form of writ which was brought against a lord "quod permittat villanos suos 'facere sectam," there was the writ of Secta ad molendinum, which required a particular person of free condition to do suit to the mill of another. When, therefore, the action was brought against a lord requiring him to permit his "villanos" to do the suit to another person's mill, the "villani" were probably persons who held in villenage, whether of free condition or not. The suit in this case might be due by custom from the villein lands, the neif terre, the bondagium, just as in the other case it was due from lands held by free tenure. It is possible, therefore, that in the reign of Edward III. a villanus was a person who might or might not be free, but held his lands in villenage, while a nativus was one of unfree condition. The case of writ of Naifty now under consideration contains in the record a passage which seems to show that a distinction was recognised between a nativus and a villanus. The lord claimed his nativi on the ground that his father had been seised of their father, as of his nativus, as of fee and right, alleging that his father had also brought a writ of Naifty against their grandfather who confessed himself in Court to be "nativum 66 et villanum ejusdem Ada" (the lord's father). It is true that tautology (though rare) is not unknown in the records, especially in ecclesiastical matters, but it is reasonable to suppose that in this case strict legal terminology was observed and that the villanus was regarded as being something different from from the nativus. For a writ of Waste there was the form (6 vastum the action venditionem, et destructionem, et exilium." In the of Waste. declaration the exilium appeared in the form “exulando "quosdam A, B. et C., nativos suos, quorum quilibet word "tenuit in villenagio.” 1 Thus we have nativos both in the action of Waste and in the writ of Naifty, and apparently for the same reason, that is to say, that the nativus was not a free man, though the villanus possibly might be. It was not waste to expel a free man who was holding in villenagio because he did not belong to the lord, but it was waste to expel a nativus holding in villenagio because he did belong to the lord. It is unfortunate that there is not in the English No English language any word to express the meaning of nativus as distinguished from villanus, since the word "neif" strictly has been restricted to the female; and imperfection to the equivalent of language is apt to lead to confusion of thought. It Latin is curious that the writ for the recovery of the bondman is called in English a writ of Naifty, and not a writ of villenage, or villainy, just as it was called in Latin a writ de nativo habendo, or a writ de naivitate,2 upon which the defendant pleaded denying “omnem "nayvitatem," ," and not omne villenagium. Enough, however, it may be hoped, has now been said to show that the Latin words of the records ought to be carefully weighed by any one who wishes to secure accuracy in dealing with the conditions in which our forefathers lived, as free men or otherwise. nativus. Monstra attribute The case of Monstraverunt with which this volume A case of commences has also some relation to the subject of verunt: villenage. It contains in the declaration a curious plaintiffs illustration of the manner in which statements might their own be deliberately invented, and even find a place on the surnames Plea Roll. The action was brought by Walter Blake, tors who Robert Revesone, John Cryps, Richard "The Loder," lived in Robert Hankyn, Alan Gybone, William "The Herte," of the There is an illustration in Y.B., Mich., 15 Edw. III., No. 62 (p. 427, note 5), and the expression “lando nativos" frequently occurs in the records. 66 exu 2 Below, p. 111, note 4. to ances the time Conqueror, |