"The Black Death brought about a ‘revolution’ in the lifestyle of the peasantry in medieval England": A Reassessment

"The Black Death brought about a ‘revolution’ in the lifestyle of the peasantry in medieval England": A Reassessment

Writer: Darcy R. Keim, MA 




In his article, The Black Death, medievalist and economic historian, Anthony R. Bridbury opened with a proclamation; asserting that “The fourteenth century was a century of violent contrasts.”[1] It may be confidently established that Bridbury’s statement is echoed within late medieval historiography. The Black Death is considered to have produced the highest continent-wide mortality rate in a year.[2] An estimation constructed from demographic data proposed a mortality rate of one-quarter to one-third of Europe’s total population.[3] For historians, addressing the short and long-term effects the Black Death had on English legal foundations, economic fluctuations, and population figures provides an insight into late medieval social mobility and labour history. Undoubtedly, it is imperative to acknowledge widespread social alterations formed as a result of political and economic factors. Furthermore, the level of impact this would have had on the lives and wellbeing of ‘ordinary’ people. In response to the overwhelming decline in population and the subsequent shortage of labourers, the fourteenth-century saw a succession of legislations enacted in England. Primarily, the content of these largely concerned the nature of serfdom, labour, and wage-rates. Arguably, the establishing of the Ordinance of Labourers (1349) and Statute of Labourers (1351)[4] was motivated by the threat of economic inflation within post-plague society. A supplementary component to the Ordinance and the Statute is the overarching intent to control employment conditions among labouring communities.[5]


What this paper seeks to resolve is whether the Black Death catalysed a ‘revolution’ in the lifestyle of peasantry in late medieval England. For the purpose – and efficiency – of engaging in detailed analysis, the aim is to focus predominantly on the livelihood of peasantry in England. The method of approach will look to examine three key canonical facets proposed in the Ordinance of 1349: (1) The regulation of employment conditions and lengths of term contracts, [6] (2) The restriction of occupational and geographical mobility,[7] and (3) The fixture of a maximum wage-rate.[8]  An additional approach will be to investigate the ‘golden age’ of women; a concept that has emerged within post-plague historiography. Medieval demography within the twentieth century saw a rise in analyses regarding the influence the Black Death had on the status of women in England.[9] From these emerged two divisive academic approaches; disputing as to whether women experienced a socio-economic ‘liberation’ throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The first of these was headlined by medievalists, Caroline M. Barron and Jeremy Goldberg. Barron and Goldberg contended that women’s societal position had remained consistent; noting that women’s liberties had minimally shifted after the Black Death.[10] In contrast, Peter Franklin proposed that peasant women were advantaged by the decreased population; affirming that – as a result – women had gained greater economic, social, and political autonomy.[11] Nonetheless, it has yet to be determined whether the Black Death catalysed a revolution in the lifestyle of women. Albeit this, the extent to which the Black Death altered the livelihood of low-status women ought to be investigated; through an assessment of women’s access to labour and rate of income and the nature of widowhood.

Firstly, the Ordinance and the Statute enforced changes to the livelihood of peasantry. A prime example of this is the introduction of mandatory labour. The Ordinance decreed that “Every man or woman, free or unfree, aged sixty years or younger and without land or a craft sufficient for self-support, must serve whoever required his labour.”[12] To summarise, compulsory labour required able-bodied members of rural and urban communities to enter manorial work. With further elaboration, the Ordinance pressed upon jurisdiction that authorised manorial lords, as well as the legal implications of refusing employment:

A lord has the preferential claim to the labour of his own tenants or villeins, but may retain only as much labour for himself as is necessary. Imprisonment, until sureties were given for their future observance, was the prescribed penalty for refusal to serve under these conditions. Any servant or labourer who, already in another's service, left that service before the end of his agreed term was also liable to imprisonment.[13] 

Certainly, the enactment of mandatory labour produced further opposition between gentry and peasantry in post-plague England. This is discernible within fourteenth-century Court Rolls and Peace Sessions. Alongside the succession of legislations, the Justices of the Peace and the Justices of the Labourers[14] were tasked with overseeing legal enforcements within urban and rural localities.[15] Peace sessions designated shires with the judicial authority to process criminal activity within their area; as opposed to being dealt with in the local leet courts.[16] Records from these sessions catalogued the type – as well as consistency – of offences found within labouring communities. More importantly, these sources impart an understanding as to the impact legislations had on peasant livelihood; as cases within Peace Sessions recurrently featured broken contracts and illegal emigration.[17]

Comparatively, the Statute of 1351 expanded upon the Ordinance; providing further detail as to the setting of wages within a variety of occupations and specifying details as to employment discipline.[18] This is exemplified by the installment of oath-taking; which required servants and labourers to swear before constables, bailiffs, stewards or lords at a minimum of twice a year.[19] The implementation of oath-swearing, data accumulated from Peace Sessions indicate that this practice was broadly incorporated within manorial communities. The purpose of oath-swearing acted as a legal formality; in which the lord received fealty from their villeins. Conversely, the process also functioned as a method by which shire-knights were able to monitor desertions. For example, within the Lincolnshire Peace Sessions, a ‘common labourer’ – John Carter – was listed as having sworn an oath on Sunday 19th of June in 1373 before the constables[20] in Apley.[21] The content of the oath required Carter to commit to manorial labour through the following summer and autumn.[22] However, Carter was charged with abandoning his post a week after this oath was taken.[23] In addition to incidents of desertion, Peace Sessions showcase examples of peasantry refusing the oath-swearing process altogether. An event listed within the Yorkshire Peace Sessions detailed the case of two offenders, Simon Smith and his wife, Johanna in 1363. Smith and his wife had objected to being sworn before constables.[24] It may be argued that the case of Smith and his wife is demonstrative of increased hostility between peasantry and gentry; the escalation of which rose in visibility due to the application of compulsory labour.

With regard to the case of John Carter, instances of labour desertion were not atypical within local Peace Sessions. Moreover -- in assessing these sources -- historians found visible patterns emerging within specific localities; namely that particular areas had experienced higher rates of desertion over others. Examples of manorial neglect present within the labouring community of Lincolnshire and Yorkshire reveal a pervasive characteristic of habitual restlessness.[25] This is particularly discernible in the case of Adam Godwyn from Upton in Norfolk. The Yorkshire Peace Sessions disclose that Godwyn – who laboured as a ploughman – had been employed by three separate lords over a period of three years in the 1370s.[26] An observation proposed by social historians, Christopher Dyer and Simon A. C. Penn, is that these instances exhibited by Godwyn – as well as two other cases in Lincolnshire during the years 1379/80 and 1393/4[27] – demonstrate why famuli rarely committed to the whole of their term.[28] Likewise, these cases stress a customary need to regularly alter employment. This occupational model is further exemplified in Somerset in 1358; by which forty-seven offenders in Axbridge, Bath, Bridgwater, Langport, and Wells were discovered to have held eight occupations – as well as a number of trades – over the course of a few years.[29]
 

An added issue concerning desertion was the development of “middle men”. According to Dyer and Penn, these individuals aimed “[…] to have secured a monopoly on a section of the workforce.” [30] One example listed within the Yorkshire Peace Sessions detailed the case of a male labourer; ordered by the constable’s assignment to the role of plough-driver from the period of Whitsunday[31] to St. Martin’s day[32] in 1361. Nevertheless, it was found that the aforementioned male had left this post and was employed by a third party.[33] The threat of employment agents was a widespread concern within rural and urban settlements. A key example of this regards Robert Archer of Forncett in Norfolk. In 1378, Archer had been charged with enticing a majority of labourers to breaking their contracts during harvest.[34] As a result of this, Forncett suffered a shortage of workers; thus leading to an inflation of wages.[35] Due to the escalating frequency of manorial abandonment, peasantry faced harsher penalties as the fourteenth-century progressed. In 1361, a legislation passed that replaced the monetary fine[36] with imprisonment if a labourer broke – or attempted to break – their term contract.[37] Additionally, it was determined that the penalty of imprisonment would be decreed by local authorities; stating that “[…] the parties shall be imprisoned in cases in which it is granted at law, notwithstanding the pardons of fines and ransom, as is aforesaid.”[38] A disputed consequence of desertion was the act of branding labourers on the forehead with the letter ‘F’ for Falsity.[39] As yet, there is no evidence within Court Rolls or Peace Sessions to verify that this sentence had ever been performed.[40] Nonetheless, the statistical consistency of desertions signified profound dissatisfaction and unease within livelihoods of peasantry.

A secondary aspect that shifted sources of revenue in post-plague England was the constraints placed on emigration. A primary characteristic of the late medieval wage earner was their accessibility to occupational and geographical mobility.[41] This is particularly identifiable in pre-Black Death Court Rolls and poll tax records; which detailed the patterns of immigration and emigration. As such, this is heavily evidenced by the pursuit of occupations throughout the eastern and northern counties of Essex, Suffolk, and Yorkshire.[42] It may be confidently ascertained that the mass migration from rural areas to urban settlements represents the attraction towns – and their opportunities – had on late medieval peasantry.[43] The introduction of new labour laws in the years 1360-1, 1388, and 1406 tightened regulations over rural labourers with harsher penalties, as well as restricted mobility to ensure peasantry could not seek work elsewhere.[44] Undeniably, the restriction of occupational and geographical mobility correlated alongside the push for compulsory labour. The records of enforcement provided information as to the distances travelled by labourers; as these had been written in the charges made against them over broken contracts.[45]

As emphasised by primary documentation, the control of migrant workers manifested through two campaigns: (1) The requirement for workers to remain within the environment they were currently stationed in, or (2) To forcibly remove migrant servants and labourers from the community and return them to their home villages.[46] For this, the Statute of Labourers required workers to remain within a term for a minimum of a year.[47] This particular edict had been imposed to prevent labourers migrating to other rural or urban settlements in search for higher wages. Moreover, restricting peasant mobility meant that landlords now held statutory authority over their workforce.[48] This may be demonstrated by the case of Thomas Wayte in Lincolnshire. In 1373, after attempting to abandon his post, Wayte was ordered to remain in the village of Hameringham; within the role of “[…] mowing hay and other suitable jobs.”[49] Although migration laws had excessively limited peasant liberties within post-plague society, these were seen to relax toward the latter half of the fourteenth-century. In 1388, the Statute of Cambridge established that peasants would be able to settle elsewhere if granted a letter of permission bearing the king’s seal.[50] However, the Statute of Cambridge also implemented a clause; by which peasantry were unable “[…] to cross hundred or wapentake boundaries without authorisation” from their current location.[51]

A third constriction placed on the income of peasantry had been the unconditional regulation of wage-rates. As a result of depopulation, the English economy (post-Black Death) had faced financial instability and wage inflation. In their analysis of monetary value in late medieval England, economic historians, Phelps Brown and Hopkins[52] calculated the figures of daily wages received by villeins and labourers throughout the fourteenth-century. In this, Phelps Brown and Hopkins observed the unsteady increase of payments made between the 1340s to the 1390s.[53] The degree of this instability is highlighted by the remuneration of skilled building workers; whose wages had risen from 3d. to 5d. per day throughout this period.[54] In conjunction with this, wage-rates of unskilled building workers had expanded from 1.5d. to 3d. per day.[55]  An additional example from Brown and Hopkins references payment received by craftsmen within the 1390s; which had experienced a 45 per cent increase over half a century.[56] Consequently, the Justices of the Peace and the Justices of the Labourers had been authorised to determine a maximum income for each respective occupation.[57] An outcome of localising income regulation had been the variation in rates of pay featured within manorial accounts; despite the intention of parliament to employ a unanimous wage regulation in the aim to discourage migration. Even so, the rate of remuneration did not solely depend on location. Wage-rates were found to be contingent with external factors; such as local demand and seasonal changes.[58] Evidence from court proceedings suggest that the reception of payment had varied considerably as well. This is illustrated by the fact that labourers were recorded to receive wages per diem, per week, per each task, per season, in cash and food.[59]  The incentive of food remuneration – as an additional form of payment – had been chiefly applied to harvest workers. Examples of this are distinguishable within the East Riding Rolls (Yorkshire); to which it has been logged that harvest workers received 3d., 4d., and 6d., per day with food.[60] It is imperative to acknowledge that the amount received by labourers had been dependent on the role that they played within manorial service. For instance, remuneration received for threshing in East Riding had been 1d. to 4d. per day, with food; contrastingly lower than the payment received by harvesters.[61]

An argument that has persisted from nineteenth-century historiography to present-day demographic studies proposed that population decline – and subsequently, the shortage of labour – acted as a catalyst toward a ‘golden age’ for women within the late medieval period.[62] This conceptualisation of a ‘golden age’ for late medieval women has remained a divisive topic. With regard to women’s roles within manorial labour, two core arguments have formulated. Firstly, that women (of lower status) would have been permitted a wider degree of access into manorial work than previously. Secondly, that wage disparity between men and women had decreased. Incidentally, it was hardly anomalous for women to be enrolled in positions of labour before the Black Death. The families of tenants were often expected to work for their lords; tending to seasonal needs, such as harvesting and stacking grain.[63] As previously detailed, the post-Black Death economic landscape saw a requirement to enter compulsory work due to the shortage of labour; a characteristic exemplified within the Ordinance of 1349:

That each man and woman (homo et femina) of our realm of England - of whatever condition, free or bond; able in body; under 60 years of age; not living by trade; nor exercising a particular craft; nor having assets with which to live or land to cultivate; nor serving another - shall be found to serve anyone who requires his/her service as the service is appropriate to his/her estate.[64]

 

In his long-term research concerning agriculture and prices from the thirteenth-century to the eighteenth-century[65], James E. Thorold Rogers found that “[…] a scarcity of labour affects the cheaper kinds of labour more fully than it does those which are most expensive.”[66] From this, it may be deduced that peasant women would have been able to easily source positions in manorial work after the Black Death.

Nevertheless, the argument of a ‘golden age’ for women is not necessarily bound by women’s accessibility to labour. An alternate perspective contended that it stemmed from women’s autonomic growth within labour roles. One method of approach is to examine whether women’s wages experienced an increase in correlation with population decline. From his investigation of wage disparity – with reference to a variety of Manorial records – Rogers claimed that women’s wages had doubled after the Black Death.[67] The influence of Rogers’ conclusion led to a commonplace presumption that medieval women obtained a level of financial independence post-Black Death. This is evidenced by William Beveridge’s study of the Westminster manorial records in 1950. Overall, Beveridge’s conclusion largely supported Rogers’ statements; having surveyed accounts of the manors of Ebury, Hyde, and Knightsbridge. In his research, Beveridge found that – on seven occasions – women in these manors had received similar wages to their male counterparts.[68] Five of these occurrences presented themselves before the Black Death, another of these was in 1348, and the final result transpired within the 1370s.[69] An additional example utilised by Beveridge regarded Suffolk manor of Hinderclay in 1358. In this, he observed that female labourers mowing stubble were remunerated equally to the unnamed (therefore, presumed male[70]) stubble-mowers in the previous year.[71] Although Rogers and Beveridge maintained confidence in their results, their respective studies continue to be widely contested among medieval demographers. Sandy Bardsley – a figure within medieval women’s studies – criticised Rogers’ research for its lack of primary material; identifying that he had failed to provide evidence that established consistent wage-equality between female and male labourers.[72] Additionally, Bardsley criticised the method of data accumulation utilised by Rogers; remarking that a comparative approach – assessing individual pay-rates within manorial records over a long-term process – could not accurately verify his hypothesis.[73] This is made evident by the fact that Beveridge and Hilton had incorporated only three examples of equal remuneration. The instances of equal pay occurred in the same location, year, and occupation. Furthermore, two of the dates utilised by Beveridge and Hilton – 1320s and 1330s – could not be argued to strengthen their theory as these occurred prior to the outbreak of plague in England.[74]

As such, the query persists as to whether female labourers received equal rates to their male counterparts. English Marxist historian, R. H. Hilton, observed that women had shared similar labour roles to men after the Black Death. A base assumption of this would indicate equal rates between female and male.[75] In his study, Hilton surveyed the number of female reapers and binders at Minchinhampton (Gloucestershire) in 1390.[76] With regard to payment, Hilton discovered that female labourers had received 4d. per day; the same rate as male labourers.[77] Additional statistics -- from the nearby manor of Avening -- demonstrated that seven women (assistants to thatchers) were paid 3.5 d. a day; the same rate of pay as two male thatchers’ assistants at Minchinhampton.[78] Despite these findings, Hilton remained hesitant to allege that the manors of Avening and Minchinhampton represented an overall shift in the financial status of peasant women. However, Hilton’s observations of women’s roles in manual labour does impart a degree of insight into gendered expectations. For example, his case-studies concerned various estates in Leicestershire in the early fifteenth-century; noting that countrywomen were recorded to have been occupying the same manual jobs as male labourers, “[…] such as haymaking, weeding, mowing, carrying corn, driving plough oxen, and breaking stones for roadmending.” [79] Despite this, Hilton ascertained that full-time female manorial servants would regularly be paid less than men.[80] Therefore, it may be regarded that the occurrences in which female workers received the same rate of pay had been statistically anomalous. In 1987, Penn utilised presentments made under the Statutes of Labourers as a basis of comparison regarding employment and payment rates between female and male labourers. [81] In this, Penn found that – presentments made prior to the Justices of Labourers and Justices of the Peace – demonstrate that female and male harvest labourers often received the same rate of pay as one another.[82]  Furthermore, that post-Black Death records highlight that women had not been discriminated against in terms of their received wages.[83] Within the East Riding Rolls[84], Penn found that it listed names, fines, occupations, and wage-rates of over 200 workers.[85] 114 of these workers were employed as harvesters; 68 of which were women and 46 men.[86] Specifically, the remuneration details of thirty-three reapers were itemised within a session held at Pocklington (23 May 1363).[87] The results illustrate that only two men received 4d for each day and of the women, twenty-one received 3d for each day. Penn argued that the difference in wage payment to these specific Yorkshire reapers was not solely based on sex.[88]

A secondary assessment regarding the argument of a ‘golden liberation’ for women concerns the nature of late medieval widowhood. The economic and social mobility of a widow vastly contrasted that of single women. Contextually, there is evidence to suggest that women’s legal autonomy was limited within late medieval English society. However, it may be – and has been -- argued that medieval widowhood provided women with a degree of accessibility to typically ‘male’ roles within society. These included enacting as landholders, estate administrators, and acting as the financial head of their families.[89] A common query pursued within demographic studies is the idea that widowhood had altered as a result of the Black Death; either through an increase in personal autonomy and mobility or a decrease due to population decline. Although single women held a more active role in the labour market, widows made up a considerable statistic of landholders.[90] A widespread supposition inferred that peasant widows either held no interest in becoming tenants or were not legally permitted to do so.[91] Conversely, it was statistically conventional for villein widows to inherit landholdings from their deceased husbands and assume the position as tenants.

Under Common Law, a widow’s inheritance share was typically one-third to one-half of her husband’s land.[92] For a villein widow, this expanded to receiving “[…] a right to life usage of the whole of the conjugal estate upon her husband's death […]"[93] A central argument within demographic studies typically asserts that the number of villein widows rose as a result of the Black Death. Franklin’s findings provide a basis of comparison between the quantities of medieval villein widows before the Black Death and afterward. Incorporating statistics collected by J. C. Russell[94] and J. F. Willard, it may be determined that -- although widowhood afforded women a degree of socio-economic independence in the high medieval period --  this was furthered by the impact of population decline after the Black Death. Surveying manorial records, Russell proposed that ‘independent widows’ (women who did not remarry after inheriting their deceased husband’s landholdings) formed 14.8 per cent of landholders in the early fourteenth-century.[95] From statistics gathered from the Lay Subsidy Rolls (before 1334), J. F. Willard estimated that 8 out of 10 per cent of tenants were female; although these estimations shifted to 4 to 6 per cent on border counties and in Gloucestershire (1327), the amount of female landholding tenants was 10 per cent.[96] Comparatively, Jane Whittle’s study -- concerning female landholders in north-east Norfolk, 1440-1580 – demonstrates fluctuations in female tenement from the fourteenth to the sixteenth centuries.  Citing Bruce Campbell’s survey of Coltishall (south-East of Hevingham)[97], Whittle discerned that the proportion of female tenants featured in Coltishall increased during the fifteenth century; with 29 per cent of landholders being women in 1406.[98] However, it may be argued that this decrease was not a direct result of the Black Death. Indeed, in 1349 – after the first outbreak – female tenants made up 18 per cent of landholders in Coltishall. However, this figure drastically decreased in 1359 to 7 per cent and in 1370 to 9 per cent.[99] A study produced by J. Z. Titow – surveying 13 manors within southern and western England – demonstrates a decrease in villein widows post-Black Death. Albeit this, Titow also emphasised that the statistics differentiated between areas; exemplified by the 6.4 per cent of female tenants seen in Taunton to the 21.6 per cent in Bishopstone.[100]

With regard to the question of a ‘golden age’ for women, there is formidable evidence to suggest that late medieval women did not gain a degree of financial independence as a result of population decline. Statistically, it appeared as if women received the same rate of pay as other demographics within the late medieval community who had earned less than adult males.[101] In 1940, Mildred Wretts-Smith – a research assistant – asserted that women had been paid at rates lower than their male counterparts; particularly in the labour of planting beans, cutting and collecting stubble for thatch and serving thatchers.[102] This disparity meant that women’s societal roles became “[…] more confined by patriarchal structures than it was changed by demographic crisis.”[103] Certainly, the level of ‘independence’ afforded to late medieval women – as claimed by Rogers and Beveridge - had yet to be defined by financial income or wage-equality. Utilising economic and political primary evidence, social and women’s historians theorised that women – after the Black Death – had been better equipped with the resources to relocate to urban areas, to delay marriages, to remain independent widows, and to enter labour.[104] Whether women experience an interpersonal revolution as a result of the Black Death has yet to be fully answered. Indeed, Goldberg argued that women had been economically enfranchised as a result of population decline; therefore opting to decline remarriage or – in the case of single women – remain so.[105]

The concept of a ‘revolution’ in the lifestyle of medieval peasants disregards nuances within late medieval society. For example, post-plague demographic studies have yet to settle whether economic fluctuations had been present prior to the Black Death. However, it is undeniable that the succession of legislations featured in post-plague England had a significant impact on the livelihood of rural and urban communities. It is imperative to acknowledge that one-third of the population relied on the sustainability of their livelihood either partially or entirely through wage-earning in the late medieval period.[106] The impact of the Ordinance and the Statute – as well as the introduction of heavy poll-taxes in the 1370s – led to the eruption of the Peasants Revolt in 1381. This landmark is not only demonstrative of the restrictions placed on labourers throughout the fourteenth-century but the extent to which members of the gentry and aristocracy were benefited by labour control and austerity. Fundamentally, there is considerable evidence to suggest that the demographic that faired best for the initial two decades after the Black Death were landholders.[107]

 

 

Bibliography

 

Primary

 

B. H. Putnam, ed., Yorkshire Sessions of the Peace 1361-1364, Yorkshire Archaeological Society Record Series 100 (1939)

 

Brown, P. H., and Hopkins. V. S., A Perspective of Wages and Prices, (New York, 1981)

 

Campbell, S. M. B., ‘Population pressure, inheritance and the land market in a fourteenth-century peasant community’, in R. M. Smith (ed.), Land, Kinship and Life-cycle, pp. 87-134

 

Cavell, E., ‘Aristocratic Widows and the Medieval Welsh Frontier: The Shrophshire Evidence: The Rees Davies Prize Essay’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, Vol. 17, (Cambridge, 2007), pp. 57-82

 

E. G. Kimball, ed., Records of Some Sessions of the Peace in Lincolnshire 1360-1375, Lincoln Record Society 30 (1936)

 

Gloucestershire Subsidy Roll, I Edward III. A.D. 1327, ed. Sir T. Phillips (Middle Hill Press, n.d.)

 

Hilton, H. R., The English Peasantry in the Later Middle Ages, (Oxford, 1975), 102-3

 

Lord Beveridge, ‘Westminster Wages in the Manorial Era’, The Economic History Review, (1955), pp. 18-35

 

Page, M. F., The Estates of Crowland Abbey: A Study of Manorial Organisation, (Cambridge, 1934)

 

‘Parliament Rolls of Medieval England’, British History Online, accessed 04 December 2016, www.british-history-ac-uk

 

R. Sillem, ed., Records of Some Sessions of the Peace in Lincolnshire 1360-1375, Lincoln

Record Society 30 (1936)

Rogers, T. E. J., A History of Agriculture and Prices in England: From the Year after the Oxford Parliament (1259) to commencement of the Continental War (1793), Vol. III: 1401-1592, (Oxford, 1866)

 

Statutes of the Realm, i, 307-8 (23 Edw. III), ed. Bennett, M. J. in ‘Compulsory Service in

England’, Past & Present, No. 209, (Oxford, 2010), pp. 7-51

 

Willard, J. F., Parliamentary Taxes on Personal Property, 1290-1334 (Cambridge, Mass. 1934), pp. 169-9

 

Yorkshire Sessions of the Peace, 1361-1364, ed. Bertha Haven Putnam (Yorkshire Archaeol. Soc. Record Series, c, Wakefield, 1939), 42-79

 

Secondary

 

Bardsley, S., ‘Women's Work Reconsidered: Gender and Wage Differentiation in  England’, Past & Present, No. 165 (Oxford, 1999), pp. 3-29

 

Bennett, M. J., ‘Compulsory Service in  England’, Past & Present, No. 209 (Oxford, 2010), pp. 7-51

 

Bridbury, R. A., ‘The Black Death’, The Economic History Review, Vol. 26, No. 4 (New Jersey, 1973), pp. 577-592

 

Cohn, S., ‘After the Black Death: Labour Legislation and Attitudes Towards Labour in Late-Medieval Western Europe’, The Economic History Review, Vol. 60, No. 3 (New Jersey, 2007), pp. 457-485

 

Dyer, C. and Penn, C. A. S., ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England: Evidence from the Enforcement of the Labour Laws’, The Economic History Review, Vol. 43, No. 3 (Glasgow, 1990), pp. 356-376

 

Franklin, P., ‘Peasant Widows' "Liberation" and Remarriage before the Black Death’, The Economic History Review, Vol. 39, No. 2 (Glasgow, 1986), pp. 186-204

 

Gates, A. L., ‘Widows, Property, and Remarriage: Lessons from Glastonbury's Deverill Manors’, Albion: A Quarterly Journal Concerned with British Studies, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Chicago, 1996), pp. 19-35

 

Haddock, D. D., and Kiesling, L., ‘The Black Death and Property Rights’, The Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 31, No. S2 (Chicago, 2002), pp. S545-S587

 

Mavis, E. M, Daughters, Wives, and Widows After the Black Death: Women in Sussex, 1350-1535, (Woodbridge, 1998)

 

Penn, C. A. S., 'Female Wage-Earners in Late Fourteenth-Century England', The Agricultural History Review, Vol. 35, No. 1 (1987), pp. 1-14

Poos, R. L., ‘The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement’, Law and History Review, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1983), pp. 27-52

Powell, E., ‘The Administration of Criminal Justice in Late-Medieval England: Peace Sessions and Assizes’, in R. Eales and D. Sullivan (ed.), The Political Context of Law, (London, 1987), pp. 49-60 

Ravensdale, J., ‘Population Changes and the Transfer of Customary Land on a Cambridgeshire Manor in the Fourteenth Century’, in R. M. Smith (ed.), Land, Kinship and Life-cycle (Cambridge, 1984), pp. 197-226

 

Russell, C. J., British Medieval Population, (Albuquerque, 1948)

 

Titow, Z. J., English Rural Society, 1200-1350, (London, 1969)

 

Wilson-Given, C., ‘The Problem of Labour in the Context of English Government, c. 1350-1450’, in J. Bothwell, P. J. P. Goldberg, W. M. Ormrod (ed.), The Problem of Labour in Fourteenth-Century England, , (Suffolk, 2000), pp. 85-100

Whittle, J., ‘Inheritance, marriage, widowhood and remarriage: a comparative perspective on women and landholding in north-east Norfolk, 1440-1580’, Continuity and Change, Vol. 13, Iss. 01 (Cambridge, 1998), pp. 33-72

 

 

 

 



[1] A. R. Bridbury, ‘The Black Death’, The Economic History Review, Vol. 26, No. 4, (New Jersey, 1973), p. 577

[2] D. D. Haddock, and L. Kiesling, ‘The Black Death and Property Rights’, The Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 31, No. S2 (Chicago, 2002), p. S545

[3] Ibid.

[4] The Ordinance of Labourers (1349) and Statute of Labourers (1351) were passed by the council of Edward III as a result of economic uncertainty, as well as the emergence of labour autonomy among villeins and workers.

[5] L. R. Poos, ‘The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement’, Law and History Review, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1983), p. 27

[6] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England: Evidence from the Enforcement of the Labour Laws’, The Economic History Review, Vol. 43, No. 3 (Glasgow, 1990), p. 357

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered: Gender and Wage Differentiation in  England’, Past & Present, No. 165 (Oxford, 1999), p. 3

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] L. R. Poos, ‘The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement’, p. 29

[13] L. R. Poos, ‘The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement’, p. 29

[14] The formation of the Justices of the Peace was largely motivated by shire-knights; who had been granted legal power to handle local felonies during the early fourteenth-century.

[15] E. Powell, ‘The Administration of Criminal Justice in Late-Medieval England: Peace Sessions and Assizes’, in R. Eales and D. Sullivan (ed.), The Political Context of Law, (London, 1987), p. 52

[16] L. R. Poos, ‘The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement’, p. 34

[17] Ibid. 31

[18] Ibid. 30

[19] Ibid.

[20] Constables directed to uphold legislations within urban and rural localities were typically substantial peasants, who were likely to have been in manorial employment within the village as well.

[21] Sillem, ed., Lincolnshire Peace Sessions, in L. R. Poos (ed.), ‘The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement’, p. 31

[22] Ibid.

[23] Ibid.

[24] Putnam, ed., Yorkshire Peace Sessions, in L. R. Poos (ed.), ‘The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement’, p. 31

[25] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 369

[26] Ibid.

[27] Each of these examples featured broken contracts after two months of employment.

[28] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, 'Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 369

[29] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 369

[30] Kimball, ed., Sessions of the peace in Lincolnshire, II, in C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn (ed.), ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 365

[31] Whitsunday marks the Christian Festival of Pentecost; occurring seven weeks after Easter.

[32] St. Martin’s Day took place on November 11th.

[33] B. H. Putnam, ed., Yorkshire Sessions of the Peace 1361-1364, in L. R. Poos (ed.), 'The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement', Law and History Review, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1983L. R. Poos, 'The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement', Law and History Review, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1983), p. 32

[34] Kimball, ed., Sessions of the peace in Lincolnshire, II, Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, (ed.), p. 365

[35] Ibid.

[36] Pre-1361, a labourer would have been required to pay a fine to his lord if they had neglected – or altogether abandoned – their position on the lord’s estate.

[37] S. Cohn, ‘After the Black Death: Labour Legislation and Attitudes Towards Labour in Late-Medieval Western Europe’, The Economic History Review, Vol. 60, No. 3, (New Jersey, 2007), p. 466-67

[38] Edward III: October 1362, ‘Parliament Rolls of Medieval England’, British History Online, accessed 04 December 2016, www.british-history-ac-uk

[39] S. Cohn, ‘After the Black Death’, p. 466-67

[40] S. Cohn, ‘After the Black Death’, p. 466-67

[41] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 363

[42] Ibid.

[43] Ibid.

[44] S. Cohn, ‘After the Black Death’, p. 466

[45] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 363

[46] C. Given-Wilson, ‘The Problem of Labour in the Context of English Government, c. 1350-1450’, in J. Bothwell, P. J. P. Goldberg, W. M. Ormrod (ed.), The Problem of Labour in Fourteenth-Century England, (Suffolk, 2000), p. 88

[47] L. R. Poos, ‘The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement’, p. 51

[48] L. R. Poos, 'The Social Context of Labourers Enforcement', Law and History Review, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1983), p. 51

[49] Sillem, ed., Lincolnshire Peace Sessions, in L. R. Poos (ed.), p. 31

[50] S. Cohn, ‘After the Black Death’, p. 466-67

[51] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 363

[52] H. P. Brown, and S. V. Hopkins, A Perspective of Wages and Prices, (New York, 1981) pp. 13-59

[53] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 356

[54] Ibid.

[55] Ibid.

[56] Ibid.

[57] S. Cohn, ‘After the Black Death’, p. 466-67

[58] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 369

[59] Ibid.

[60] Ibid.

[61] Ibid.

[62] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered: Gender and Wage Differentiation in  England’, Past & Present, No. 165, (Oxford, 1999), p. 3

[63] Ibid. 5

[64] J. M. Bennett, ‘Compulsory Service in  England’, Past & Present, No. 209, (Oxford, 2010), p. 9

[65] In the nineteenth-century, historian, James E. Thorold Rogers’ produced a multi-volume study examining the relationship between economic fluctuations and agriculture from the late medieval to the early modern period in England: A History of Agriculture and Prices in England: From the Year after the Oxford Parliament (1259) to commencement of the Continental War (1793). Volume III covered the years 1401-1592; in which Rogers incorporated records held by the Oxford and Cambridge Colleges. For example, in the Oxford Colleges, Rogers looked at Merton, New, Oriel, Magdalen, and Corpus Christi. Colleges like Magdalen, Rogers insisted in the volumes introduction, contained rolls pertaining to Sir John Fastolfe’s estates; supplying information regarding prices in Norfolk in the fourteenth and fifteenth-centuries and providing insight into the transactions of the estate. Likewise, the Corpus Christi accounts imparted a wide-variety of information concerning prices during the reign of Edward VI.

[66] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered’, p. 3

[67] Ibid. 5-6

[68] Ibid. 6

[69] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered’, p. 6

[70] In her article, Women's Work Reconsidered: Gender and Wage Differentiation in England, Sandy Bardsley noted that the ‘normal’ unit used to determine labour participants in late medieval sources often signified a ‘healthy, adult male’. Therefore, if the records assigned labour to sexless individuals, it is often assumed that the individual listed was male.

[71] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered’, p. 6

[72] Ibid. 6

[73] Ibid. 8

[74] Ibid. 6

[75] Ibid. 7-8

[76] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered’, p. 7-8

[77] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered’, p. 7-8

[78] Ibid. 7-8

[79] R. H. Hilton, The English Peasantry in the Later Middle Ages, (Oxford, 1975), p. 102

[80] Ibid. 103

[81] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered’, p. 8

[82] Ibid. 9

[83] Ibid.

[84] Penn’s survey of East Riding of Yorkshire covers the period of March 1363 to May 1364.

[85] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered’, p. 11

[86] Ibid.

[87] S. A. C. Penn, 'Female Wage-Earners in Late Fourteenth-Century England', The Agricultural History Review, Vol. 35 No. 1, (1987), p. 9

[88] S. A. C. Penn, ‘Female Wage-Earners in Late Fourteenth-Century England’, p. 9

[89] E, Cavell, 'Aristocratic Widows and the Medieval Welsh Frontier: The Shrophshire Evidence: The Rees Davies Prize Essay', Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, Vol. 17, (Cambridge, 2007), p. 59

[90] J. M. Bennett, ‘Compulsory Service in  England’, p. 34-5

[91] P. Franklin, ‘Peasant Widows' "Liberation" and Remarriage before the Black Death', The Economic History Review, Vol. 39, No. 2 (Glasgow, 1986), p. 186

[92] L. A. Gates, 'Widows, Property, and Remarriage: Lessons from Glastonbury's Deverill Manors', Albion: A Quarterly Journal Concerned with British Studies, Vol. 28 No. 1, (Chicago, 1996), p. 19

[93] Ibid.

[94] Sylvia L. Thrupp, a leading figure in medieval social history, attested that Russell was the first historian to utilise statistical methods to comparatively assess the impact that epidemic plague had on medieval population size. (Plague Effects in Medieval Europe: Demographic Effects of Plague: A Comment on J. C. Russell's Views, 1966)

[95] P. Franklin, ‘Peasant Widows’, p. 188

[96] Ibid.

[97] B. M. S. Campbell, ‘Population pressure, inheritance and the land market in a fourteenth-century peasant community’, in R. M. Smith (ed.), Land, Kinship and Life-cycle, pp. 87-134

[98] J. Whittle, ‘Inheritance, marriage, widowhood and remarriage: a comparative perspective on women and landholding in north-east Norfolk, 1440-1580’, Continuity and Change, Vol. 13, Iss. 01 (Cambridge, 1998), p. 36

[99] Ibid.

[100] Ibid. 37

[101] Ibid.

[102] S. Bardsley, ‘Women's Work Reconsidered’, p. 4

[103] Ibid.

[104] Ibid. 3

[105] Ibid. 9

[106] C. Dyer, and S. A. C. Penn, ‘Wages and Earnings in Late Medieval England’, p. 356

[107] S. Cohn, ‘After the Black Death’, p. 481

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Introduction to Meg Finlayson!

"The Gendered Presentations of Athena" -- Poppy Robbins

How did Popular Culture Contribute to the Rise of a United States Empire at the End of the Nineteenth Century?