Agricultural History Review, Volume 67 Part 1 (2019), p. 139

This volume presents an account of the estates belonging to the Lords of Hornby, a manor nine miles to the north east of Lancaster. Background information is presented on the Lords of the Manor from as early as 1465, starting with the three Stanleys (Lords Mounteagle), the three Parkers (known as Lords Morley and Mounteagle) through to Colonel Francis Charteris, Earl of Wemyss. The first chapter concludes with a description of the origins and location of the various estates, which extended beyond the manor and parish of Hornby.

Chapter two opens with a short description of tenant right, under which the estates were managed, and its impact on the lords’ income. Indeed, on p. 58, Holt notes that ‘failure to overturn tenantright’ meant that ‘lands became a diminishing asset’. A review of the various legal battles between landlord and tenant includes the enclosure of moorland at Tatham and the disputes regarding the rights to take timber. Holt goes on to discuss enfranchisement, which allowed the owning lords to sell their rights to the tenants, after which the latter were effectively freeholders. Two enfranchisements are considered in particular – those of 1711 and 1774 – both of which occurred in a period when ownership of the estates changed hands: Holt considers this to be asset-stripping by the lords.

The purpose of both the 1582 Survey and the 1751 Sederunt was to determine the economic potential of the estates at points of transition and was related directly to the financial aspects of tenantright – the title of chapter three The annual value accruing to the landlords is examined in comparison to that of the customary tenants: here Holt finds that whilst the landlords took 18 per cent of the total in 1582, by 1774 this had decreased to three per cent with the tenants directly benefiting from the other 97 per cent. The changes on the estates over this period are then examined to understand what brought about this effect. The four main factors were absentee landlords with estates managed by an agent, a reduction in the direct farming of the demesne lands, less focus on the town of Hornby, and the fact that the Lord was no longer able to intervene in the society of his estates.

Noting that the organization of the castle’s household in 1582 was essentially medieval, chapter four observes that the real power on the estates lay with the customary tenants rather than their absentee landlords. Using the Survey and Sederunt, supplemented by other sources, this chapter examines how the resources of the Hornby estates were managed. It considers those who held office, be it as bailiffs, stewards, receivers and constables: it also looks at the court system and the appointment of jurors. Further, tenants were responsible for the maintenance of common resources such as corn kilns, mills and weirs, bridges and roads – in fact, all of the facilities provided to every individual on the estate. The power of the churchwardens and the Twenty-Four is also examined, with specific consideration given to the Quakers who lived in the area. The chapter then moves on to consider the distribution of land in terms of farm sizes, as well as the right to cattle closes or cattle gates in the outlying, higher land. Finally, this leads to a discussion of the landscape of the Hornby estate area and its features, and in particular, the effects of enclosure and improvement on that landscape.

In the final chapter of the introductory section, the economies of activities beyond the land are examined: these provided an additional source of income for some tenants. However, there were others making a living on the estate who were not tenants. For example, a tenant might malt and brew his or her own grain. On the other hand, there could be non-tenant maltsters and brewers who bought in grain: these and other independent tradespeople formed a wider economic community that took little or no notice of the Lord of Hornby.

Starting with the arable economies, the expected range of crops was grown, although potatoes were being grown in 1663: the inventories of a number of Hornby inhabitants who died in the 1670s included reference to this new crop. Livestock was again as expected, along with the food crops arising from fish and game. The practice of share cropping, or farming to halves, is examined with examples being given of its application to animals, albeit less usually than for field crops. The management of the estate’s woodlands is looked at along with buildings in terms of the structures, materials and usage: most of the buildings are measured in bays and outshots, even when not cruck-built. Finally, the wide range of trades practised by the residents is considered, in terms of their contribution to the wealth of the area.

In summary, the introductory chapters examine the Hornby estates on the basis of documentary evidence, from the viewpoint of who held the power, how they achieved and kept it, and the economic implications for the lords, tenants and the wider population. Having extracted and summarized the changes in agrarian practice over a two hundred year period, a transcription of the two key documents, the 1582 Survey and the 1751 Sederunt, is clearly presented. This is followed by a number of appendices presenting key supporting documents.

Written in the way that many records society volumes are produced, the introductory section preceding the transcribed documents excels itself in its extent (224 pages) and its quality. The obvious errors are few and minor, such as the date of the Pentecost Rental in Table 2 (1772 not 1722) or the term ‘bouse’ (p. 206), which is not included in the Glossary. There are also errors of addition in the transcription: however, these may be errors in the original documents. Overall, this is a splendid piece of work which is clearly written, well bound on quality paper and will provide source material for students of agricultural and rural history, as well as for those interested in vernacular architecture and social change.