Agricultural History Review, Volume 57 Part 2 (2009), p. 276

The historian of the medieval peasantry is spoilt by the availability of excellent sources from the later thirteenth century onwards in manorial court records, which, though not without their problems, allow unparalleled insights into the daily lives of peasants in their communities. To study such communities in the aftermath of the first arrival of the Black Death is an interesting and potentially illuminating prospect, allowing the exploration of issues such as the nature of the changes in feudal relationships between lords and peasants, the crisis of feudalism and the notion of the feudal reaction, and inter-peasant relationships after demographic collapse.

Larson’s study, based on the rich manorial records of Durham, allows us some fascinating insights into the changes the Black Death brought to the peasant communities of the estates of the Bishops and the Prior and Convent of Durham in a comparative context.

The book is in two parts. Part one contains a useful and engaging discussion of the historiography of the peasantry and lord-peasant relationships, while also providing the essential context and background of the workings of the estate structure of Durham and the role of various greater and lesser estate officials.

Part two of the book covers the period after the first arrival of the Black Death in Durham, tracing the fortunes of the manorial communities living on the estates through the resulting socio-economic upheaval. What follows is a lively and insightful study of the peasantry and their lords living and struggling through the trauma of the Black Death and the subsequent social and economic adjustments the stricken communities and their lords had to make.

Larson paints an image of communities and seigniorial power in crisis, with increasing numbers of vacant holdings and acres of untilled land, and tenants reluctant to pick up empty holdings. In this context Larson’s discussion dovetails into the wider debate of the nature of the feudal reaction and the question of the crisis of feudalism. Some of the arguments raised here have been touched on previously by Richard Britnell, particularly in Past and Present 128 (1990): the idea of an immediate and aggressive feudal reaction, which split the peasantry asunder. Larson’s comparative approach indicates that there were some differences between seigniorial policy and peasant reaction on the different estates. An interesting aspect of the study is the conclusion that communal cohesion was a crucial factor in the peasantry’s ability to resist and unite against seigniorial demands.

The seigniorial policies of the Priory of Durham, it is argued, helped to divide the village community, especially between the wealthier and poorer members of the peasantry. Thus, on the main estates of the Priory, Larson observed a marked increase in violence between tenants, which was not so much in evidence in the villages of the bishopric. This development was however not solely due to inequalities between the peasants, but rather stemmed from weaker communal cohesion, evidenced by the inability of the peasantry to unite, an abundance of cases of petty disputes between neighbours, and the need for seigniorial officials to intervene actively in the regulation of village agricultural affairs.

In the later fourteenth century Larson also notes a corresponding increase in the number of cases of violence between tenants recorded in the court rolls. There are some very interesting titbits of information, including which kind of insults were considered to be particularly offensive to villagers and resulted in accusations of defamation, such as ‘neif’ or ‘bitch of a neif’ (p.187) – or indeed how games of football could spark off violence (p.190).

Larson rightly calls for a greater appreciation of local differences in our understanding of the changes in lord-peasant and inter-peasant relationships across the fourteenth century. In comparing the communities under the respective jurisdictions of the Bishopric and the Priory, Larson concludes that while conflict was in evidence in all of these, a stronger communal spirit seemed to prevail in the Bishopric than in the Priory’s estate, where the upheaval witnessed in the latter half of the fourteenth century created a community characterized by stronger individualism.

A potential weakness of the book is that the detailed study of the communities only commences with the arrival of the Black Death, as a substantial pre-plague comparison of the communities would have been of great interest. At times it would have been helpful to have some more precise information at hand, such as figures for changing seigniorial incomes across the century or more data on the types of offences committed against lordship or against other tenants. However, this does not distract from the fact that this is a very satisfying book, which not only makes an important contribution to our understanding of peasant communities and the effects of the Black Death, but which will appeal to undergraduate students and experts alike.