It appears from Mr. Turner’s computation of the different classes forming the population of Suffolk, as shown in Domesday, that some 10,000 out of the 22,000 were in the condition of serfs, bound to some manor, either as small tenant farmers paying rent as well as services for their land, or as cottage tenants working on the demesne, or as mere slaves or thralls, the absolute property of the lords. [21] I will not take you further into this obscure and complicated question than to say that the bondage of the greater part of the Anglo-Saxon peasantry implied little more than that they were bound to remain on the estate to perform the services for which they held their land. These services were fixed as strictly as a money rent would be, and left them plenty of time for working on their own land, while the law provided various means by which they could obtain freedom for themselves and their children. The Church—at all events the parish clergy—always used their influence to obtain the freedom of the lowest and most servile class. We read of a case where an hereditary serf was holding the high position of bailiff of a large manor. Turner says:—
“It is mentioned in the laws as an incentive to proper actions that through God’s gift a servile thrall may become a thane, and a cœorl an Earl, just as a singer may become a priest and a writer a bishop.” In the time of Ethelstane it is expressly declared that “if a cœorl have a full proprietorship of five hides of land, a church, and a kitchen, a bell house and a burghate seat, and an appropriate office in the King’s hall, he shall thenceforth be a thane by right”
The opportunities, however, which the condition of society in Saxon times offered for a serf to rise from the lowest to the highest ranks must have been very few. In these days trade and the professions furnish such a ladder, but in Saxon times there was no profession but the church, whose members sometimes found remunerative employment as clerks, or by devoting themselves to religious duties rose to the highest offices. The only trades in Saxon times were those of the handicraftsmen, and, except in London and a few other towns, these would be confined to the blacksmith and a few such craftsmen as were indispensable to the smallest agricultural community.
Craftsmen.
Among the few literary productions of the Anglo Saxons which have been preserved, we find descriptions of the more common trades given in the form of dialogues. I take the following from Mr. Turner’s work. The shoemaker (sceowerhta) thus describes his trade:—
“My craft is very necessary to you. I buy hides and skins and prepare them by art, and make of them shoes of various kinds, and none of you can winter without my craft. I make ankle leathers, shoes, and leather hose; bridle thongs, trappings, neck pieces, and halters; bottles, flasks, boiling vessels, wallets and pouches.”
So the Saxon shoemaker was a much more accomplished man than the shoemaker of the present day, for he combined the arts of the tanner, the currier, and the harness maker with that of shoemaking. The smith says:—
“Whence the share of the ploughman or the goad? but from my art.
“Whence to the fisherman his angle? or to the shoe maker his awl? or to the sempstress her needle but from my art?”
In Hereford there are six smiths mentioned in Domesday.
They paid a penny a year rent for their forges, and had to make up 120 pieces of iron for the king from the metal supplied them. He must have been a very skilful blacksmith who could turn out such different ironwork as ploughshares and needles and fishhooks. A very important tradesman was the miller. Mills were a much valued property, and are always mentioned in the Domesday returns.