gatekeeper，andthechiefshepherdenterintoagreementsinregardtoextensiveplotsofland。35*Theyappearasentirelyfreetodisposeofsuchproperty，andateverystepwefindinthecartulariesofGlastonburyAbbeyproofsoftheexistenceofanumerousandpowerful’sergeant’class。JohnofNorwood，AbbotofBurySt。Edmund’s，hadtoresorttoaregularcoupd’閠atinordertodisplacetheprivilegedfamilieswhichhadgotholdoftheofficesandtreatedthemashereditaryproperty。36*Infactthegreat’sergeants’endedbyhamperingtheirlordsmorethanservingthem。Andthesamefactoftheriseofa’ministerial’classmaybenoticedoneverysingleestate，althoughitisnotsoprominentthereasinthegreatcentresoffeudallife。Thewholearrangementwasbrokenbythesubstitutionofthe’cashnexus’formoreancientkindsofeconomicrelationship，andbythespreadoffreeagreements：itisnotdifficulttoseethatboththesefactsactedstronglyinfavourofdrivingouthereditaryandcustomaryobligations。
Wehaveconsideredtherelativepositionoftheunfreeholdings，ofthedomaniallandaroundwhichtheyweregrouped，andoftheclasswhichhadtoputthewholemachineryofthemanorintoaction。Butincidentallywehadseveraltimestonoticeasetofmenandtenementswhichstoodinapeculiarrelationtothearrangementwehavebeendescribing：therewereinalmosteverymanorsomefreetenantsandsomefreetenementsthatcouldnotbeconsideredasbelongingtotheregularfabricofthewhole。theyhadtopayrentsoreventoperformlabourservices，buttheirobligationsweresubsidiarytotheworkofthecustomarytenantsonwhichthehusbandryofthemanorialdemesneleanedforsupport。Fromtheeconomicpointofviewwecanseenoinherentnecessityfortheconnexionoftheseparticularfreetenementswiththatparticularmanorialunit。Therent，largeorsmall，couldhavebeensentdirectlytothelord’shousehold，orpaidinsomeothermanorwithoutanyperceptiblealterationinfavourofeitherparty；thework，iftherewassuchtoperform，waswithoutexceptionofarathertriflingkind，andcouldhavebeeneasilydispensedwithandcommutedformoney。
Severalreasonsmaybethoughtoftoexplainthefactthatfreetenementsarethusgroupedalongwiththevillainholdingsandworkedintothatsingleunit，themanor。Itmaybeurgedthatthedivisionintomanorsisnotmerelyandperhapsnotchieflyaneconomicone，butthatitreflectsacertainpoliticalorganisation，whichhadtodealwithandtoclassfreetenantsaswellasservilepeople。Itmaybeconjecturedthatevenfromtheeconomicpointofview，althoughthecaseoffreetenantswouldhardlyhavecalledthemanorialunitintoexistence，itwasconvenienttousethatclasswhenoncecreatedforthegroupingofvillainlandandwork：whyshouldthefreetenantsnotjointhedivisionsformedforanotherpurposebutlocallywithineasyreachandthereforeconvenientlysituatedforsuchintercoursewiththelordaswasrenderednecessarybythecharacterofthetenement？Again，thegroupingoffreetenantsmayhaveoriginatedinatimewhentheconnexionwiththewholewasfeltmorestronglythaninthefeudalperiod；itmaypossiblygobacktoacommunitywhichhadnothingorlittletodowithsubjection，andinwhichthefreelandownersjoinedformutualsupportandorganisation。Itisnotimpossibletoassume，ontheotherhand，thatinmanycasesthefreetenantwasleftinthemanorialgroupbecausehehadbegunbybeinganunfreeandthereforeanecessarymemberofit。Allsuchsuppositionsseemprimafacieadmissibleandreasonableenough，andatthesametimeitisclear，thatbydecidinginfavourofoneofthemorbytherelativeimportanceassignedtoeachweshallverymateriallyinfluencethesolutionofinterestinghistoricalproblems，inordertoappreciaterightlythepositionofthefreetenementsinthemanorwehavetoexaminewhetherthesetenementsareallofoneandthesamekindornot，andthismustbedonenotfromthelegalstandpointwhenceithasalreadybeenreviewed，butinconnexionwiththepracticalmanagementoftheestate。Ithinkthatasurveyofthedifferentmeaningswhichthetermbearsinourdocumentsmustleadustorecognisethreechiefdistinctions：firstthereisfreelandwhichonceformedpartofthedemesnebuthasbeenseparatedfromit；thenthereisthelandheldbyvillagersoutsidetheregulararrangementsoftheruralcommunity，andlastlythereareancientfreeholdingsofthesameshapeastheserviletenements，thoughdifferingfromthelatterinlegalcharacter。Eachclasswillnaturallyfallintosubdivisions。37*
Underthefirstheaditistobeobservedthatdomaniallandveryoftenlostitsdirectconnexionwiththelord’shousehold，andwasgivenawaytodependentpeopleoncertainconditions。OneofthequestionsaddressedtothejuriesbytheGlastonburyinquestof1189waspromptedbythispractice：itwasaskedwhatdemesnelandhadbeengivenoutunderfreeagreementorservileconditions，andwhetheritwasadvantageoustokeeptothearrangementornot。Oneofthereasonswhichlayattherootoftheprocesshasbeenalreadytouchedupon。Grantsofdomaniallandoccurcommonlyinreturnforservicesrenderedintheadministrationofthemanor：reeves，ploughmen，herdsmen，woodwardsaresometimesrecompensedinthismannerinsteadofbeingliberatedfromthedutiesincumbentontheirholding。A
smallrentwasusuallyaffixedtotheplotseveredfromthedemesne，andthewholearrangementmayberegardedasverylikeanordinarylease。Anattenuatedformofthesamethingmaybenoticedwhensomeofficerorservantwaspermittedtousecertainplotsofdomaniallandduringthetenureofhisoffice。Ithappened，forinstance，thatacotterwasentrustedtotakecareofateamofoxenbelongingtothelordorobligedtodrivehisplough。Hemightberepaideitherbyleavetousethemanorialploughonhisownlandonspecifiedoccasions，orelsebyanassignmenttohimofthecroponcertainacresofthehomefarm。38*Suchprivilegesaresometimesgrantedtovillagerswhodonotseemtobepersonallyemployedinthemanorialadministration，butsuchcasesarerare，andmustbeduetospecialreasonswhichescapeournotice。