310
THE SAXONS IN ENGLAND.
[book I.
by the household. The remainder of the land the
owner leased on various conditions to men who
had no land; demanding in return for that com-
modity, indispensable in a country which has not
yet learnt to manufacture, rents paid in kind, in
labour, and even in money. This labour-rent, yet
called robot in Slavonic countries, as well as the
other dues, naturally varied in various districts,
partly with? the importance of land ɪ, to the culti-
vator, and the value of its produce to the owner.
And at last political motives may have had some
weight, when the number and condition of a man’s
dependents might affect his own influence and po-
sition in the state : but in general we shall be justi-
fied in saying that land was very valuable, and the
conditions on which it was to be obtained harsh and
onerous2. Such land, whether in large or in small
portions, whether leased on long or short terms,
large or small rents, was called by the common
name of Laen, or loan3. It was considered to be
lent ; and where the Iaen was on folcland, it is ob-
1 The “ Rectitudines Singularum Personarum ” inform us that they
were very different in different places, which necessarily would be the
case. We can imagine that a butsecarl or fisherman of Kent was not
so anxious to have a holding as a peasant in.Gloucestershire.
2 Even in the eighth century Ini found it necessary to enact, that if
a man took land on condition of gafol or produce-rent, and his lord
endeavoured to raise his rent also to service, he need not abide by the
bargain, unless the lord would build him a house : and he was, in such
a case, not to lose the crop he had prepared. Ini, § 07. Thorpe, i. 146.
3 The transitory possessions of this life were often so described, in
reference to the Almighty : “Sa æhta ,δe him God alæned hæfô.” Cod.
Dipl. No. 699. A læn for life, even though guarded by a very detailed
boo or charter, is distinctly called benejicium by the grantee, JESelbald
of Wessex. . Cod. Dipl. No. 1058.
CH. XI.]
læ'nland.
311
vious that no certain time could be assigned, and
that the after-tenant could have only a tenancy at
will. In any case it was reasonable that miscon-
duct in the holder, which would Iiave entailed upon
him the forfeiture of his owτn real property, should
not be permitted to interfere with the rights of the
reversioner : Iaenland therefore could not be taken
from the owner, for the crime of the tenant. In the
year 900 a certain. Helmstan was guilty of theft, and
the sheriff seized all his chattels to the king : and
Ordlaf entered upon the land, “ because it was his
laén that Helmstan sat on : that he could not for-
feit 1." A similar principle prevailed in grants for
lives, especially where ecclesiastical corporations
were the grantors and reversioners; and which,
though to a certain extent they conveyed estates
of bocland, gave, strictly speaking, læn or bene-
ficiary tenures 2. But as the clergy were not always
quite sure of meeting with fair treatment, we find
them not Unfrequently introducing into their instru-
ments a provision that no forfeiture shall be valid
against their rights ; this, from the great strictness
with which the provisions of a book or charter were
always construed, and in general from the fear of
violating what had been confirmed by the signature
of the cross and the threat of eternal punishment,
may have had some effect. In such cases it may
ɪ Cod. Dipl. No. 328.
2 Thus EalhfriS bishop of Winchester (871-877) making a grant for
. lives to duke CuSred, properly calls it a læn : “ EalferS lj Sa higan hab-
baS gelæned,” etc. Cod. Dipl. No. 1002. They reserved ecclesiastical,
but no secular dues.