The earliest agrarian measures of which we have any record are the distributions of land conquered in war to poor citizens, which later authorities attribute to Numa and Servius Tullius. Such assignments, however, are not the result of legislative acts, but of a voluntary surrender on the king's part of his own portion of the spoils. It is probable that the agrarian law which resulted from the proposals of Spurius Cassius (consul 486 B.C.) was the first attempt made by the Roman people to exercise its control over the occupation of state territory. According to the traditional account, Cassius proposed that such portion of lands lately conquered from the Hernici as fell to the Roman state should be divided in equal shares between the Roman plebs and the Latins; and further that poor citizens should receive allotments of land previously conquered, and occupied without any legal right by the Patricians. The inclusion of the Latins in the distribution was afterwards dropped; but the law in its final form certainly asserted the right of the Plebeians to take their share in the public land. The accounts given of it by Livy and Dionysius are no doubt coloured by their knowledge of later agrarian legislation, and it seems hardly likely that the proposal to resume and redistribute public land already occupied was made at this early stage; but it probably challenged the exclusive claim of Patricians to occupy. We hear of another agrarian law proposed by the tribune Lucius Icilius in 456 B.C. (Lex Icilia de Aventino publicando) which regulated in some way the tenure of public land on the Aventine. In 376 B.C. the tribunes Licinius and Sextius introduced into their laws, for the promotion of the privileges of the plebs, a clause enacting that no more than 500 jugera of land should be occupied by a single cultivator. It seems almost certain from Livy's account that this measure referred only to the occupation of ager publicus, though some modern authorities have upheld the view that it dealt with land held on any kind of tenure, others again that it dealtonlywith private property in land. According to Appian, the law also enacted that only 100 cattle and 500 sheep might be turned by one owner on the public pastures. But it failed of its object because it did not provide any adequate machinery for the resumption by the state of land held in excess of the prescribed amount, and was therefore easily evaded. The next agrarian law we hear of was a more special measure dealing with lands conquered from the Senones and Picentines. In 232 B.C. C. Flaminius, then tribune of the plebs, proposed to resume these lands for the state, although they were already occupied by large landholders, and to distribute them in allotments to poor citizens. The measure met with much opposition from the richer classes, and did not gain the sanction of the senate; but C. Flaminius ignored constitutional usage and brought it direct before the council of the plebs, by which it was made law. In 133 B.C. the tribune Tiberius Gracchus (q.v.) re-enacted the earlier measure of Licinius and Sextius, with the additional provisions that each owner might occupy 250 jugera for each son, in addition to the original 500, and that a commission of three (iii. viri agris dandis adsignandis) should be appointed to carry out the terms of the law. He also enacted that the land occupied in excess of the prescribed amount, and on that account resumed for the state by the land commission, should be distributed in inalienable lots to poor citizens. Subsequent modifications of those provisions which dealt with the powers of the land commission led to a re-enactment of the whole by C. Gracchus, the brother of Tiberius, tribune in 123 B.C. But within 15 years from the tribunate of C. Gracchus the whole of his law had been rendered null by three further enactments. The first of these permitted the sale of land allotted under the law, which thus tended to return into the hands of its former occupiers as private property, which the state had no longer any right to resume. The second abolished the commission appointed to carry out the terms of the law, thus putting a stop to further resumption and distribution, and also transformed existing occupiers into owners of the land they occupied, paying only a small due to the treasury. The third (probably the surviving Lex Agraria, Bruns, loc. cit.) abolished the payment. This law belongs to the year 111 B.C. The dates of the two former laws are uncertain, but it is probable that the first was passed in 121, the second in 119 or 118. From this time forward a change comes over land legislation. The ordinary public land in Italy, in the hands of occupiers, which had given rise to all the agrarian legislation between 376 and 111, had practically ceased to exist. The Campanian land still remained, but the same reasons which led to its exemption from the Gracchan legislation seem to have continued to protect its holders until 63 B.C. In the meantime several agrarian laws were passed which provided for the distribution of land placed in some other way at the disposal of the state. In 100 B.C. Appuleius Saturninus (q.v.), tribune of the plebs, proposed the allotment of lands recently taken from the Cimbri in Gaul. This law was passed, but eventually declared null by the senate, with the rest of Saturninus's laws. A more dangerous precedent was set by Sulla in his dictatorship (82-81 B.C..) He was the first to confiscate the lands of his political foes, and of communities which had resisted him, and treating them as ager publicus, assign them to his veterans as a prize. This example was followed by Octavian (Augustus) and Antony (M. Antonius) after their proscriptions in 43 B.C. A third method of providing land for distribution was that adopted by Servilius Rullus (q.v.) in 63 B.C. His bill enacted that land should be purchased in Italy with money gained by the sale of Roman territories abroad, and allotted to citizens. A commission of ten (x. viri agris dandis adsignandis), annually elected by 9 out of the 35 tribes, was to carry out the terms of the law. Rullus also ventured to propose the distribution of the Campanian land, which had hitherto been respected by all agrarian reformers. It was chiefly on this ground that Cicero in his three speeches on the Agrarian law succeeded in exciting such a general feeling against it that it was eventually withdrawn. In 60 B.C. the tribune L. Flavius brought forward a bill for the distribution of lands to Pompey's veterans. The Campanian land was certainly to be included in the distribution, and it is clear from Cicero that the bill in some way dealt violently with the rights of private owners. It also, however, enacted that land should be purchased by the state with the wealth which Pompey's conquests had brought into the treasury. The last proposal was supported by Cicero, but the bill seems to have been dropped, only to reappear in more moderate form in the following year. A consular bill, the lex Julia Campana, was passed by Julius Caesar in 59 B.C., which provided for the settlement of Pompey's veterans on the Campanian land, and other lands purchased by the state from private owners in Italy with the full consent of the latter. In its original form, the bill omitted all reference to the Campanian land, which seems to have been included by Caesar in the distribution only when the continued and unreasoning opposition of the senate had goaded him to extreme measures. A commission of twenty was to be appointed to carry out the law, from which Caesar himself was expressly excluded. This measure finally settled the question of the Campanian land, which now passed out of the category of ager publicus. The last agrarian law of the republic was that passed in 44 B.C. on the proposal of the consul M. Antonius, or of his brother L. Antonius. We have no detailed account of the measure, but it seems to have provided grants of land for veterans, and was to be administered by seven commissioners. The law was afterwards cancelled by decree of the senate, probably on the ground of some technical flaw. The emperor Vespasian attempted to reclaim for the state small oddments of land (subseciva) which were held by neighbouring owners to whom they had never been definitely assigned. The attempt met with violent opposition, and though resumed by Titus, was finally crushed by Domitian, who issued an edict recognizing all oddments of land thus held to be private property.
AUTHORITIES.—Niebuhr, History of Rome (English translation), ii. p. 129 foll. (Cambridge, 1832); Becker, Handbuch der romischen Alterthumer, iii. 2, p. 142 (Leipzig, 1843); Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, i. p. 96 foll. (Leipzig, 1881); Madvig, Verfassung und Verwaltung des romischen Staates, ii. p. 364 foll. (Leipzig, 1882), (See also ROME, History.) (A. H. J. G; A. M. CL.)
AGREDA, MARIA FERNANDEZ CORONEL, ABBESS OF, known in religion as Sor (Sister) Maria de Jesus (1602-1665), was the daughter of Don Francisco Coronel and of his wife Catalina de Arana. She was born at Agreda, on the borders of Navarre and Aragon, on the 2nd of April 1602. All her family were powerfully influenced by the ecstatic piety of Spain in that age. Her biographer, Samaniego, records that even as an infant in arms she was filled with divine knowledge. Her stupidity as a child is piously accounted for by extreme humility. From childhood she was favoured by ecstasies and visions. When she was fifteen the whole family entered religion. The father, now an old man, and the two sons entered the Franciscan house of San Antonio de Nalda. Maria, her mother and sister established a Franciscan nunnery in the family house at Agreda, which, when Maria's reputation had extended, was replaced by the existing building. She began it with one hundred reals (one pound sterling) lent her by a devotee, and it was completed in fourteen years by voluntary gifts. Much against her own wish, we are told, she was appointed abbess at the age of twenty-five. In 1668, four years after her death, the Franciscans published a story that at the age of twenty-two she had been miraculously conveyed to Mexico, to convert a native people, and had made five hundred journeys through the air for that purpose in one year. Though the rule required the abbess to be changed every three years, Maria remained the effective ruler of Agreda till her death. The Virgin was declared abbess, and Maria acted as her locus tenens. In her later years she inclined to the ``internal prayer,'' and neglect of the outward offices of the church, which was usual with the ``alumbrados'' or Quietists. The Inquisition took notice of her, but she was not proceeded against with severity. Maria's importance in religion and Spanish history is based on two grounds. In the earlier part of her life, while the Franciscan, Francisco Andres de la Torre, was her confessor, she wrote an Introduction to the History of the Most Blessed Virgin. It was destroyed by the direction of another confessor. Later on, by the order of her superiors, and under the guidance of her Franciscan confessor, Andres de Fuen Mayor, she wrote The Mystic City of God. It is an extraordinary book, full of apocryphal history, visions and scholasticism, which professes to have been written by divine inspiration, and is devoted to praise of the Virgin. In 1642 she sent to Philip IV. an account of a vision she had had, of a council of the infernal powers for the destruction of Catholicism and Spain. The king visited her when on his way to Aragon to suppress the rebellion of Catalonia. A long correspondence, which lasted till her death on the 29th of March 1665, was begun. The king folded a sheet of paper down the middle and wrote on the one side of the division. The answers were to be written on the other and the sheet returned. By a pious fraud copies were kept at Agreda. How far Maria was only the mouthpiece of the Franciscans must of course be a matter of doubt. Her correspondence was apparently suspended whenever her confessor was absent. She must, however, have co-operated at least, and it is certain that the Franciscans, who were very unfortunate in some of their pious women, owed not a little to her. The letters are in excellent Spanish, are curious reading, and are invaluable as illustrations for the second part of the reign of Philip IV.
The correspondence of Sor Maria with the king has been published in full by Don F. Siluela, Cartas de la Venerable Madre Sor Maria de Agreda y del Senor Rey Don Filipe IV. (Madrid, 1885). The Mystic City of God is one of the most characteristic monuments of Mariolatry, and has continued to be much in favour with supporters of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. It appeared in Madrid in 1668, with a biographical introduction by Samaniego, has been often reprinted, and was translated into French and Italian. It was for a time reserved by the Index, both Spanish and Papal, but was taken off by the influence of the Franciscans and of Spain, the chief supporters of the immaculate Conception. An account of Maria de Agreda will be found in the Tracts of Michael Geddes (London, 1706),vol. iii., written by a competent critic and Anglican divine of the 18th century who detested ``enthusiasm.'' (D. H.)
AGRICOLA, CHRISTOPH LUDWIG (1667-1719), German landscape painter, was born and died at Regensburg (Ratisbon). He spent a great part of his life in travel, visiting England, Holland and France, and residing for a considerable period at Naples. His numerous landscapes, chiefly cabinet pictures, are remarkable for fidelity to nature, and especially for their skilful representation of varied phases of climate. In composition his style shows the influence of Caspar Poussin, while in light and colour he imitates Claude Lorraine. His pictures are to be found in Dresden, Brunswick, Vienna, Florence, Naples and many other towns of both Germany and Italy.
AGRICOLA (the Latinized form of the name BAUER), GEORG (1490-1555), German scholar and man of science, known as ``the father of mineralogy,'' was born at Glauchau in Saxony on the 24th of March 1490. Gifted with a precocious intellect, he early threw himself into the pursuit of the ``new learning,'' with such effect that at the age of twenty he was appointed Rector extraordinarius of Greek at the so-called Great School of Zwickau, and made his appearance as a writer on philology. After two years he gave up his appointment in order to pursue his studies at Leipzig, where, as rector, he received the powerful support of the professor of classics, Peter Mosellanus (1493-1524), a celebrated humanist of the time, with whom he had already been in correspondence. Here he also devoted himself to the study of medicine, physics and chemistry. After the death of Mosellanus he went for a short time to Italy, where he took his doctor's degree. On his return he settled as practising physician in the Joachimstal, a centre of mining and smelting works, his object being partly ``to fill in the gaps in the art of healing,'' partly to test what had been written about mineralogy by careful observation of ores and the methods of their treatment. His thorough grounding in philology and philosophy had accustomed him to systematic thinking, and this enabled him to construct out of his studies and observations of minerals a logical system which he began to publish in 1528. Bermannus, sive de re metallica dialogus, the first attempt to reduce to scientific order the knowledge won by practical work, brought Agricola into notice. In 1530 Prince Maurice of Saxony appointed him historiographer with an annual allowance, and he migrated to Chemnitz, the centre of the mining industry, in order to widen the range of his observations. The citizens showed their appreciation of his learning by appointing him town physician and electing him burgomaster. His popularity was, however, short-lived. Chemnitz was a violent centre of the Protestant movement, while Agricola never wavered in his allegiance to the old religion; and he was forced to resign his office. He now lived apart from the contentious movements of the time, devoting himself wholly to learning. His chief interest was still in mineralogy; but he occupied himself also with medical, mathematical, theological and historical subjects, his chief historical work being the Dominatores Saxonici a prima origine ad hanc aetatem, published at Freiberg. In 1544 he published the De ortu et causis subterraneorum, in which he laid the first foundations of a physical geology, and criticized the theories of the ancients. In 1545 followed the De natura eorum quae effluunt e terra; in 1546 the De veteribus et novis metallis, a comprehensive account of the discovery and occurrence of minerals; in 1548 the De animantibus subterraneis; and in the two following years a number of smaller works on the metals. His most famous work, the De re metallica, libri xii., was published in 1556, though apparently finished several years before, since the dedication to the elector and his brother is dated 1550. It is a complete and systematic treatise on mining and metallurgy, illustrated with many fine and interesting woodcuts and containing, in an appendix, the German equivalents for the technical terms used in the Latin text. It long remained a standard work, and marks its author as one of the most accomplished chemists of his time. Believing the black rock of the Schlossberg at Stolpen to be the same as Pliny's basalt, he applied this name to it, and thus originated a petrological term which has been permanently incorporated in the vocabulary of science.
In spite of the early proof that Agricola had given of the tolerance of his own religious attitude, he was not suffered to end his days in peace. He remained to the end a staunch Catholic, though all Chemnitz had gone over to the Lutheran creed; and it is said that his life was ended by a fit of apoplexy brought on by a heated discussion with a Protestant divine. He died at Chemnitz on the 21st of November 1555, and so violent was the theological feeling against him, that he was not suffered to rest in the town to which he had added lustre. Amidst hostile demonstrations he was carried to Zeitz, seven miles from Chemnitz, and there buried.
See article by Gumbel in Allgem. Deutsche Biog.(1875); F. L. Becher, Georg Agricola und Werner(Freiberg, 1819); F. A. Schmidt, Georg Agricola'sBermannus mit Einleitung (Freiberg, 1806); Poggendorff,Biographisches Handworterbuch; Agricola's works passim.
AGRICOLA, GNAEUS JULIUS (A.D. 37-93), Roman statesman and general, father-in-law of the historian Tacitus, was born on the 13th of June A.D. 37 (according to others, 39) at Forum Julii (Frejus) in Gallia Narbonensis. His father, Julius Graecinus, having been put to death by Caligula, Agricola was brought up by his mother Julia Procilla. After studying philosophy at Massilia, he entered the army and served (59) under Suetonius Paulinus in Britain. In 61 he returned to Rome, where he married Domitia Decidiana, a Roman lady of distinction. In 63 he was quaestor in Asia, in 65 tribune, in 68 praetor, and when Vespasian was proclaimed emperor, he immediately declared himself his supporter. In 70 he was appointed to the command of the 20th legion in Britain, then stationed at Deva (Chester). On his return to Rome at the end of three years he was made censor, raised to the rank of patrician, and appointed governor of Aquitania (74-78). Appointed consul suffectus in the following year, he was admitted into the college of pontiffs and made governor of Britain. In the same year he betrothed his daughter to Tacitus. Although the legation of Britain lasted as a rule only three years, Agricola held the post for at least seven and succeeded in reconciling the inhabitants to Roman rule and inducing them to adopt the customs and civilization of their conquerors. His military achievements were equally brilliant. After conquering the Ordovices in North Wales and the island of Mona (Anglesey), during the next two years he carried his victorious arms to the Taus (Tay; others read Tanaus, perhaps the north Tyne), and in his fourth campaign fortified the country between Clota and Bodotria (the firths of Clyde and Forth) as a protection against the attacks of the Caledonians. Having explored the coasts of Fife and Forfar, he gained a decisive victory over the Caledonians under Galgacus at the Graupian hill (see BRITAIN, Roman.) His successes, however, had aroused the envy and suspicion of Domitian. He was recalled to Rome, where he lived a life of studied retirement, to avoid the possibility of giving offence to the tyrant. He died in 93, poisoned, it was rumoured, by the emperor's orders. The Life of Agricola by his son-in-law Tacitus is practically a panegyric or funeral oration.
See Urlichs, De Vita et Honoribus Agricolae (1868); Dio Cassius xxxix. 50, lxvi. 20: Mommsen, Provinces of the Roman Empire (Eng. trans., 1886), i. 183-184, 194.
AGRICOLA, JOHANN FRIEDRICH (1720-1774), German musician, was born at Dobitschen in Saxe-Altenburg, on the 4th of January 1720. While a student of law at Leipzig he studied music under Johann Sebastian Bach. In 1741 he went to Berlin, where he studied musical composition. He was soon generally recognized as one of the most skilful organists of his time; and in 1751, as the result of a comic opera, Il Filosofo convinto in amore, performed at Potsdam, he was made court composer to Frederick the Great. He died in Berlin on the 1st of December 1774. In 1759, on the death of Karl Heinrich Graun, he was appointed conductor of the royal orchestra. Besides several operas of merit, he composed instrumental pieces and church music. His reputation chiefly rests, however, on his theoretical and critical writings on musical subjects. He wrote under the pseudonym of Flavio Anicio Olibrio.
AGRICOLA (originally SCHNEIDER, then SCHNITTER), JOHANNES (1494-1566), German Protestant reformer, was born on the 20th of April 1494, at Eisleben, whence he is sometimes called Magister Islebius. He studied at Wittenberg, where he soon gained the friendship of Luther. In 1519 he accompanied Luther to the great assembly of German divines at Leipzig, and acted as recording secretary. After teaching for some time in Wittenberg, he went to Frankfort in 1525 to establish the reformed mode of worship. He had resided there only a month when he was called to Eisleben, where he remained till 1526 as teacher in the school of St Andrew, and preacher in the Nicolai church. In 1536 he was recalled to teach in Wittenberg, and was welcomed by Luther. Almost immediately, however, a controversy, which had been begun ten years before and been temporarily silenced, broke out more violently than ever. Agricola was the first to teach the views which Luther was the first to stigmatize by the now well-known name Antinomian (q.v.), maintaining that while the unregenerate were still under the Mosaic law, Christians were entirely free from it, being under the gospel alone. In consequence of the bitter controversy with Luther that resulted, Agricola in 1540 left Wittenberg secretly for Berlin, where he published a letter addressed to the elector of Saxony, which was generally interpreted as a recantation of his obnoxious views. Luther, however, seems not to have so accepted it, and Agricola remained at Berlin. The elector Joachim II. of Brandenburg, having taken him into his favour, appointed him court preacher and general superintendent. He held both offices until his death in 1566, and his career in Brandenburg was one of great activity and influence. Along with Julius von Pflug, bishop of Naumburg-Zeitz, and Michael Helding, titular bishop of Sidon. he prepared the Augsburg Interim of 1548. He endeavoured in vain to appease the Adiaphoristic controversy (see ADIAPHORISTS.) He died during an epidemic of plague on the 22nd of September 1566. Agricola wrote a number of theological works which are now of little interest. He was the first to make a collection of German proverbs which he illustrated with a commentary. The most complete edition, which contains seven hundred and fifty proverbs, is that published at Wittenberg in 1592; a modern one is that of Latendorf, 1862.
See Cordes, Joh. Agricola's Schriften moglichst verzeichnet (Altona, 1817); Life by G. Kawerau (1881), who also wrote the notice in Hauck-Herzog, Realencyk. fur prot. Theol., where other literature is cited.
AGRICOLA, MARTIN (c. 1500-1556), German musician, was born about 1500 in Lower Silesia. His German name was Sohr or Sore. From 1524 till his death he lived at Magdeburg, where he occupied the post of teacher or cantor in the Protestant school. The senator and music-printer Rhau, of Wittenberg, was a close friend of Agricola, whose theoretical works, providing valuable material concerning the change from the old to the new system of notation, he published. Agricola was also the first to harmonize in four parts Luther's chorale, Ein' feste Burg.
Four other Agricolas1 are known as composers between the end of the 15th century and the middle of the 17th.
In the 18th century we find Burney, in the course of his tour in Germany (1772), much impressed by JOHANN FRIEDRICH AGRICOLA (1720-1774), court composer and director of the royal chapel to Frederick the Great. This Agricola was a pupil of Bach, and a fine organist and clever writer on music, especially on operatic style, the problems of which were beginning to be raised by French writers-and composers in preparation for the work of Gluck.
AGRICOLA, RODOLPHUS (properly ROELOF HUYSMANN) (1443-1485), Dutch scholar, was born at Baflo, near Groningen, in 1443. He was educated at Louvain, where he graduated as master of arts. After residing for some time in Paris, he went in 1476 to Ferrara in Italy, and attended the lectures of the celebrated Theodorus Gaza (1400-1478) on the Greek language. Having visited Pavia and Rome, he returned to his native country about 1479, and was soon afterwards appointed syndic of Groningen. In 1482, on the invitation of Johann von Dalberg, bishop of Worms (1445-1503), whose friendship he had gained in Italy, he accepted a professorship at Heidelberg, and for three years delivered lectures there and at Worms on the literature of Greece and Rome. By his personal influence much more than by his writings he did much for the promotion of learning in Germany; and Erasmus and other critics of the generation immediately succeeding his own are full of his praises. In his opposition to the scholastic philosophy he in some degree anticipated the great intellectual revolution in which many of his pupils were conspicuous actors. He died at Heidelberg on the 28th of October 1485. His principal work is De inventione dialectica, libri iii., in which he attempts to change the scholastic philosophy of the day.
See T. F. Tresling, Vita et Merita Rudolphi Agricolae (Groningen, 1830); v. Bezold, R. Agricola (Munchen, 1884): and Ihm, Der Humanist R. Agricola, sein Leben und seine Schriften (Paderb., 1893).
AGRICULTURAL GANGS, groups of women, girls and boys organized by an independent gang-master, under whose supervision they execute agricultural piece-work for farmers in certain parts of England. They are sometimes called ``public gangs'' to distinguish them from ``private gangs'' consisting of workers engaged by the farmer himself, and undertaking work solely for him, under his own supervision or under that of one of his men. The system was for long prevalent in the counties of Cambridgeshire, Huntingdonshire, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Norfolk and Suffolk, and is still to be found in a much modified form in the fen district. The practice dates from the latter years of the reign of George III., when the low-lying, marshy lands surrounding the basin of the Wash were being rapidly drained and converted into rich alluvial districts. The unreformed condition of the poor-law, under which the support of the poor fell upon each individual parish, instead of a union of parishes, made landlords reluctant to erect cottages on the reclaimed land for the benefit of their tenants. Labour had to be obtained for the cultivation of these new lands, and that of women, girls and boys, being cheaper than the labour of men, was consequently very largely employed. The tendency to moral and physical ruin which resulted from this nomadic life was so great that an inquiry into the condition of agricultural child-labour was included in the reference to the commission on child-labour appointed in 1862, and the results were so startling that the Agricultural Gangs Act was passed in 1867, forbidding the employment of any child under eight years old, and of any female under a male gangmaster unless a female licensed to act as gang-mistress were also
1 Alexander, died 1506; Johann, flor. 1600; Wolfgang Christoph, flor. 1630; and George Ludwig, 1643-1676. present. Gang-masters must be licensed by two justices, and may not hold a liquor license. The distance to be traversed on foot is fixed by the justices, and the licenses must be renewed every six months. Later legislation made more stringent the regulations under which children are employed in agricultural gangs. By the Elementary Education Act 1876, repealing and re-enacting the principal provisions of the Agricultural (Children) Act 1873, no child shall be employed under the age of eleven years, and none between eleven years and thirteen years before the child has obtained a certificate of having reached the standard of education fixed by a by-law in force in the district.
AGRICULTURE (from Lat. ager, field, and colere, to cultivate), the science, art and industry of utilizing the soil so as to produce the means of human subsistence, embracing in its widest sense the rearing of live-stock as well as the raising of crops. The history of agriculture is the history of man in his most primitive, and most permanent aspect. Hence the nations of antiquity ascribed to it a divine origin; Brahma in Hindustan, Isis in Egypt, Demeter in Greece, and Ceres in Italy, were its founders. The simplest form of agriculture is that in which crops are raised from one patch of ground till it is exhausted, when it is allowed to go wild and abandoned for another. This ``extensive'' husbandry is found in combination with a nomadic or semi-nomadic and pastoral organization, such as that of the German tribes described by Caesar and Tacitus (see especially Germania, 26). The discovery of the uses of the bare fallow and of manure, by making it possible to raise crops from the same area for an indefinite period, marks a stage of progress. This ``intensive'' culture in a more or less developed form was practised by the great nations of antiquity, and little decided advance was made till after the middle ages. The introduction of new plants, which made it possible to dispense with the bare fallow, and still later the application to husbandry of scientific discoveries as to soils, plant constituents and manures, brought about a revolution in farming. But the progress of husbandry, evidenced by the production of larger and better crops with more certainty, is due to that rationalizing of agricultural practices which is the work of modern times. What before was done in the light of experience is nowadays done in the light of knowledge. Even the earliest forms of intensive cultivation demand the practice of the fundamental processes of husbandry—ploughing, manuring, sowing, weeding, reaping. It is the improvements in methods, implements and materials, brought about by the application of science, that distinguish the husbandry of the 20th century from that of medieval and ancient times.
Ancient Husbandry.—The monumental records of Egypt are the source of the earliest information on farming. The Egypt
Egypt.
of the Pharaohs was a country of great estates farmed either by tenants or by slaves or labourers under the superintendence of stewards. It owed its fertility to the Nile, which, inundating the land near its banks, was distributed by means of canals over more distant portions of its valley. The autumnal subsidence of the river was followed by shallow ploughing performed by oxen yoked to clumsy wooden ploughs, the clods being afterwards levelled with wooden hoes by hand. Next came the sowing, the seed being pressed into the soil by the feet of sheep which were driven over the fields. At harvest the corn was cut high on the stalk with short sickles and put up in sheaves, after which it was carried to the threshing-floor and there trodden out by the hoofs of oxen. Winnowing was done by women, who tossed the grain into the air with small wooden boards, the chaff being blown away by the winds. Wheat and barley were the chief crops, and another plant, perhaps identical with the durra, i.e. millet, of modern Egypt, was also cultivated. The latter, when ripe, was pulled up by the roots, and the grain was separated by means of an implement resembling a comb. To these crops may be added peas, beans and many herbs and esculent roots. Oxen were much prized, and breeding was carried on with a careful eye to selection. Immense numbers of ducks and geese were reared.
Diodorus Siculus, writing of later times, says that cattle were sent during a portion of each year to the marshy pastures of the delta, where they roamed under the care of herdsmen. They were fed with hay during the annual inundation, and at other times tethered in meadows of green clover. The flocks were shorn twice annually (a practice common to several Asiatic countries), and the ewes yeaned twice a year. (See also EGYPT.)
The agriculture of the region bordering the Tigris and Euphrates, like that of Egypt, depended largely on irrigation, and traces of ancient canals are still to be seen in Babylonia. But beyond the fact that both Babylonia and Assyria were large producers of cereals, little is known of their husbandry.
The nomads of the patriarchal ages, whilst mainly dependent upon their flocks and herds, practised also agriculture proper.
Biblical accounts among the Israelites.
The tracts over which they roamed were in ordinary circumstances common to all shepherds alike. During the summer they frequented the mountainous districts, and retired to the valleys to winter. Vast flocks of sheep and of goat constituted their wealth, although they also possessed oxen. When the last were abundant, it seems to be an indication that tillage was practised. Job, besides immense possessions in flocks and herds, had 500 yoke of oxen, which he employed in ploughing, and a ``very great husbandry.'' Isaac, too, conjoined tillage with pastoral husbandry, and that with success, for ``he sowed in the land Gerar, and reaped an hundred-fold''—a return which, it would appear, in some favoured regions, occasionally rewarded the labour of the husbandman. In the parable of the sower, Jesus Christ mentions an increase of thirty, sixty and an hundred fold.
Along with the Babylonians, Egyptians and Romans, the Israelites are classed as one of the great agricultural nations of antiquity. The Mosaic Institute contained an agrarian law, based upon an equal division of the soil amongst the adult males, a census of whom was taken just before their entrance into Canaan. Provision was thus made for 600,000 yeomen, assigning (according to different calculations) from sixteen to twenty-five acres of land to each. This land, held in direct tenure from Jehovah, their sovereign, was in theory inalienable. The accumulation of debt upon it was prevented by the prohibition of interest, the release of debts every seventh year, and the reversion of the land to the proprietor, or his heirs, at each return of the year of jubilee. The owners of these small farms cultivated them with much care, and rendered them highly productive. They were favoured with a soil extremely fertile, and one which their skill and diligence kept in good condition. The stones were carefully cleared from the fields, which were also watered from canals and conduits, communicating with the brooks and streams with which the country ``was well watered everywhere,'' and enriched by the application of manures. The seventh year's fallow prevented the exhaustion of the soil, which was further enriched by the burning of the weeds and spontaneous growth of the Sabbatical year. The crops chiefly cultivated were wheat, millet, barley, beans and lentils; to which it is supposed, on grounds not improbable, may be added rice and cotton. The chief implements were a wooden plough of simple and light construction, a hoe or mattock, and a light harrow. The ox and the ass were used for labour. The word ``oxen,'' which occurs in our version of the Scriptures, as well as in the Septuagint and Vulgate, denotes the species, rather than the sex. As the Hebrews did not mutilate any of their animals, bulls were in common use. The quantity of land ploughed by a yoke of oxen in one day was called a yoke or acre. Towards the end of October, with which month the rainy season begins, seedtime commenced, and of course does so still. The seedtime, begun in October, extends, for wheat and some other white crops, through November and December; and barley continues to be sown until about the middle of February. The seed appears to have been sometimes ploughed in, and at other times to have been covered by harrowing. The cold winds which prevail in January and February frequently injured the crops in the more exposed and higher districts. The rainy season extends from October to April, during which time refreshing showers fall, chiefly during the night, and generally at intervals of a few days. The harvest was earlier or later as the rains towards the end of the season were more or less copious. It, however, generally began in April, and continued through May for the different crops in succession. In the south, and in the plains, the harvest, as might be expected, commenced some weeks earlier than in the northern and mountainous districts. The slopes of the hills were carefully terraced and irrigated wherever practicable, and on these slopes the vine and olive were cultivated with great success. At the same time the hill districts and neighbouring deserts afforded pasturage for numerous flocks and herds, and thus admitted of the benefits of a mixed husbandry. Not by a figure of speech but literally, every Israelite sat under the shadow of his own vine and fig-tree; whilst the country as a whole is described (2 Kings xviii. 32) as ``a land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards, a land Of oil olive and of honey.''
The earliest known forms of intensive husbandry were based chiefly upon the proximity of rivers and irrigation. The
Greece.
agriculture of classical ages was slightly more developed in so far as the husbandman of Greece and Rome was less likely to leave to nature the fertilization of the soil. Greece being a mountainous land was favourable to the culture of the vine rather than to that of cereals. Scanty information on its agriculture is to be derived from the Works and Days of Hesiod (about the 8th century B.C.), the Oeconomicus of Xenophon (4th century B.C.), the History o/ Plants and the Origin o/. Plants of Theophrastus (4th century B.C..)The latter is the first writer on botany, and his works also contain interesting remarks on manures, the mixing of soils and other agricultural topics (see also GEOPONICI.) Greek husbandry had no salient characteristics. The summer fallow with repeated ploughing was its basis. The young crop was hoed, reaping was performed with a sickle, and a high stubble left on the ground as manure. The methods of threshing and winnowing were the same as those in use in ancient Egypt. Wheat, barley and spelt were the leading crops. Meadows were pastured rather than mown. Attica was famous for its olives and figs, but general agriculture excelled in Peloponnesus, where, by means of irrigation and drainage, all the available land was utilized.
In the early days of the Roman republic land in Italy was held largely by small proprietors, and agriculture was highly esteemed
Rome.
and classed with war as an occupation becoming a free man. The story of Cincinnatus, twice summoned from the plough to the highest offices in the state, illustrates the status of the Roman husbandman. The later tendency was towards the absorption of smaller holdings into large estates. As wealth increased the peasant-farmer gave way before the large landowner, who cultivated his property by means of slave-labour, superintended by slave-bailiffs. The low price of grain, which was imported in huge quantities from Sicily and other Roman provinces, operated to crush the small holder, at the same time as it made arable farming unremunerative. Sheep-raising, involving larger holdings, less supervision and less labour, was preferred by the capitalist land-holder to the cultivation of the wheat, spelt, vines or olives which were the chief crops of the country. Lupine, beans, peas and vetches were grown for fodder, and meadows, often artificially watered, supplied hay. Swine and poultry were used for food to a greater extent than oxen, which were bred chiefly for ploughing. The following epitome of Virgil's advice to the husbandman in the first book of the Georgics suggests the outline of Roman husbandry: ``First learn the peculiarities of your soil and climate. Plough the fallow in early spring, and plough frequently—twice in winter, twice in summer unless your land is poor, when a light ploughing in September will do. Either let the land lie fallow every other year or else let spelt follow pulse, vetches or lupine. Repetition of one crop exhausts the ground; rotation will lighten the strain, only the exhausted soil must be copiously dressed with manure or ashes. It often does good to burn the stubble on the ground. Harrow down the clods, level the ridges by cross ploughing, work the land thoroughly. Irrigation benefits a sandy soil, draining a marshy soil. It is well to feed down a luxuriant crop when the plants are level with the ridge tops. Geese and cranes, chicory, mildew, thistles, cleavers, caltrops, darnel and shade are farmer's enemies. Scare off the birds, harrow up the weeds, cut down all that shades the crop. Ploughs, waggons, threshing-sledges, harrows, baskets, hurdles, winnowing-fans are the farmer's implements. The plough consists of several parts made of seasoned wood. The threshing-floor must be smooth and rammed hard to leave no crevices for weeds and small animals to get through. Some steep seed in soda and oil lees to get a larger produce. Careful annual selection by hand of the best seed is the only way to prevent degeneration. It is best to mow stubble and hay at night when they are moist.''
In addition to the use of several kinds of animal and other manures, green crops were sometimes ploughed in by the Romans. The shrewdness which, more than inventiveness, characterized their husbandry comes out well in the following quotation from the 18th book of the Natural History of Pliny:—``Cato would have this point especially to be considered, that the soil of a farm be good and fertile; also, that near it there be plenty of labourers and that it be not far from a large town; moreover, that it have sufficient means for transporting its produce, either by water or land. Also that the house be well built, and the land about it as well managed. They are in error who hold the opinion that the negligence and bad husbandry of the former owner is good for his successor. Now, I say there is nothing more dangerous and disadvantageous to the buyer than land so left waste and out of heart; and therefore Cato counsels well to purchase land of one who has managed it well, and not rashly to despise and make light of the skill and knowledge of another.''
Roman writers on agriculture (see GEOPONICI) are more numerous than those of Greece. The earliest important treatises are the De re Rustica of Cato (234-149 B.C.) and the Rerum Rusticarum Libri of Varro. More famous than either are the Georgics of Virgil, published about 30 B.C., and treating of tillage, horticulture, cattle-breeding and bee-keeping. The works of Columella (1st century A.D.) and of Palladius (4th century A.D.) are exhaustive treatises, and the Natural History of the elder Pliny (A.D. 23-70) contains considerable information on husbandry. Under the later empire agriculture sank into a condition of neglect, in which it remained throughout the Dark Ages. In Spain its revival was due to the Saracens, and by them, and their successors the Moors, agriculture was carried to a high pitch of excellence. The work on agriculture1 of Ibn-al-Awame, who lived in the 12th century A.D., treats of the varieties of soils, manuring, irrigation, ploughing, sowing, harvesting, stock, horticulture, arboriculture and plant diseases, and is a lasting record of their skill and industry.
The subsequent history of agriculture is treated in the following pages primarily from the British standpoint. Doubtless Flanders may claim to be the pioneer of ``high farming'' in medieval times, other countries following her lead in many respects. It is not, however, necessary to deal with the agricultural evolution of continental Europe, the gradual progress of agriculture as a whole being well enough typified in the story of its development in England, which indeed has led the way in modern times. After sections on the history and chief modern features of British agriculture, a separate account is given of the general features of American agriculture.
The ``combined'' or ``common-field'' system of husbandry practised by the village community or township (see VILLAGE COMMUNITIES) may be taken as the starting-point of English agriculture, in which, till the end of the 18th century, it is a dominant influence. The territory of the ``township'' consisted of arable land, meadow, pasture and waste. The arable land was divided into two or, more usually, three fields, which were cut up into strips bounded by balks and allotted to the villagers in such a way that one holding might include several disconnected strips in each field—a measure designed to prevent the whole of the best land falling to one man. The fields were fenced in from seed-time to harvest, after which the fences were taken down and the cattle turned in to feed on the stubble. According to early methods of cropping, which were destined to prevail for centuries, wheat, the chief article of food, was sown in one autumn, reaped the next August; the following spring, oats or barley were sown, and the year following the harvest was a period of fallow. This procedure was followed on each of the three fields so that in every year one of them was fallow. In addition to the cereals, beans, peas and vetches were grown to some extent. The meadow-land was also divided into strips from which the various holders drew their supply of hay. The pasture-land was common to all, though the number of beasts which one man might turn into it was sometimes limited. Rough grazing could also be had on the outlying waste lands. In the absence of artificial grasses and roots, hay was very valuable; it constituted almost the only winter food for live stock, which were consequently in poor condition in spring.
Under the manorial system, the rise of which preceded the Norman Conquest, communal methods of husbandry remained, but the position of the cultivator was radically altered. ``Villeins,'' instead of free-holders, formed the most numerous class of the population. They were bound to the soil and occupied holdings of scattered strips (amounting usually to a virgate or 30 acres) in return for a payment partly in labour and partly in kind. A portion of the manor, generally about a third, constituted the lord's demesne, which, though sometimes separate, usually consisted of strips intermingled with those of his villeins. It thus formed part of the common farm and was cultivated by the villeins and their oxen under the superintendence of a bailiff. Below the villeins in the social scale came the cottiers possessing smaller holdings, sometimes only a garden, and no oxen. Free tenants and, after the Norman Conquest, slaves formed small proportions of the population. During the middle ages cattle and sheep were the chief farm animals, but the intermixture of stock consequent on the common-field system was a barrier to improvement in the breed and conduced to the propagation of disease. Oxen, usually yoked in teams of eight, were used for ploughing. Sheep were small and their fleeces light, nevertheless, owing to the meagreness of the yields of cereals2 and the demand for wool for export, sheep-farming was looked to, as early as the 12th century, as the chief source of profit. Pigs and poultry were universally kept. The treatise on husbandry of Walter of Henley, dating from the early 13th century, is very valuable as describing the management of the demesne under the two- or three-field system. The following are typical passages:—
``April is a good season for fallowing, if the earth breaks up behind the plough: for second fallowing after St John's Day when the dust rises behind the plough; for seed-ploughing when the earth is well settled and not too cracked; however, the busy man cannot be always waiting on the seasons.'' ``At sowing do not plough large furrows, but little and well laid together, that the seed may fall evenly.''
``Know that an acre sown with wheat takes three ploughings, except lands that are sown each year, and that each ploughing costs 6d. more or less and the harrowing 1d. It is well to sow at least two bushels to the acre.''
``Change your seed every year at Michaelmas, for the seed grown on other land will bring you more than that grown on your own.''
``Neither sell your stubble nor move it from the ground unless you need it for thatching. Have manure put up in heaps and mixed with earth.''
``Ridge marshy ground so as to let the water run off.''
During the 13th century there arose a tendency to commute labour-rents for money payments. This change led to the gradual disappearance of tenants in villeinage—the villeins and cottiers—and the rise on the one hand of the small independent farmer, on the other of the hired labourer. The plague of 1348 marks an epoch in English agriculture. The diminution of the population by one-half led to a scarcity of labour and an increase of wages which deprived the landowner of his narrow margin of profit. To meet this situation, the Statute of Labourers (1351) enacted that no man should refuse to work at the same rate of wages as prevailed before the plague. In addition the landowners attempted to revive the disappearing system of labour-rents. The bitter feelings engendered between employer and employed culminated in the peasants' revolt of 1381. Meanwhile large numbers of landowners were forced to adopt one of two alternatives. In some cases they ceased to farm their own land and let it out on lease often together with the stock upon it; or else they abandoned arable culture, laid down their demesnes to pasture, enclosed the waste lands and devoted themselves to sheep-farming. In the latter course they were encouraged by the high prices of wool during the 14th century, and by Edward III.'s policy of fostering both the export of wool and the home manufacture of woollen goods. The 15th century, barren of progress in methods of husbandry, was in its early years moderately prosperous. Later on the increasing abandonment of arable husbandry for sheep-farming brought about a less demand for labour, and rural depopulation was accelerated as the peasant was deprived of his grazing-ground by the enclosure of more and more of the waste land.3
From the beginning of the reign of Henry VII. to the end of Elizabeth's, a number of statutes were made for the
Agriculture under the Tudors and Stuarts.
encouragement of tillage, though probably to little purpose. ``Where in some towns,'' says the statute 4th Henry VII. (1488), ``two hundred persons were occupied and lived of their lawful labours. now there are occupied two or three herdsmen, and the residue fall into idleness''; therefore it is ordained that houses which within three years have been let for farms, with twenty acres of land lying in tillage or husbandry, shall be upheld, under the penalty of half the profits, to be forfeited to the king or the lord of the fee. Almost half a century afterwards the practice had become still more alarming; and in 1534 a new act was tried, apparently with as little success. ``Some have 24,000 sheep, some 20,000 sheep, some 10,000, some 6000, some 4000, and some more and some less''; and yet it is alleged the price of wool had nearly doubled, ``sheep being come to a few persons' hands.'' A penalty was therefore imposed on all who kept above 2000 sheep; and no person was to take in farm more than two tenements of husbandry. By the 39th Elizabeth (1597) arable land made pasture since the 1st Elizabeth shall be again converted into tillage, and what is arable shall not be converted into pasture.
The literature of agriculture, in abeyance since the treatise of Walter of Henley, makes another beginning in the 16th century. The best of the early works is the Book of Husbandry (1st ed. 1523), commonly ascribed to Sir Anthony Fitzherbert, a judge of the Common Pleas in the reign of Henry VIII., but more probably written by his elder brother John. This was followed by the Book of Surveying and Improvements (1523), by the same author. In the former treatise we have a clear and minute description of the rural practices of that period, and from the latter may be learned a good deal of the economy of the feudal system in its decline.
The Book of Husbandry begins with a description of the plough and other implements, after which about a third part of it is occupied with the several operations as they succeed one another throughout the year. Among other passages in this part of the work, the following deserve notice:—
``Somme (ploughs) wyll tourn the sheld bredith at every landsende, and plowe all one way''; the same kind of plough that is now found so useful on hilly grounds. Of wheel-ploughs he observes, that ``they be good on even grounde that lyeth lyghte''; and on such lands they are still most commonly employed. Cart-wheels were sometimes bound with iron; of which he greatly approves. On the much agitated question about the employment of horses or oxen in labour, the most important arguments are distinctly stated.
``In some places,'' he says, ``a horse plough is better,'' and in others an oxen plough, to which, upon the whole, he gives the preference. Beans and peas seem to have been common crops. He mentions the different kinds of wheat, barley and oats; and after describing the method of harrowing ``all maner of cornnes,'' we find the roller employed. ``They used to role their barley grounde after a showr of rayne, to make the grounde even to mowe.'' Under the article ``To falowe,'' he observes, ``the greater clottes (clods) the better wheate, for the clottes kepe the wheat warme all wynter; and at March they will melte and breake and fal in manye small peces, the whiche is a new dongynge and refreshynge of the corne.'' This is agreeable to the present practice, founded on the very same reasons. ``In May, the shepe folde is to be set out''; but Fitzherbert does not much approve of folding, and points out its disadvantages in a very judicious manner. ``In the latter end of May and the begynnynge of June, is tyme to wede the corne''; and then we have an accurate description of the different weeds, and the instruments and mode of weeding. Next comes a second ploughing of the fallow; and afterwards, in the latter end of June, the mowing of the meadows begins. Of this operation, and of the forks and rakes and the haymaking there is a very good account. The corn harvest naturally follows: rye and wheat were usually shorn, and barley and oats cut with the scythe. The writer does not approve of the common practice of cutting wheat high and then mowing the stubbles. ``In Somersetshire,'' he says, ``they do shere theyr wheat very lowe; and the wheate strawe that they purpose to make thacke of, they do not threshe it, but cut off the ears, and bynd it in sheves, and call it rede, and therewith they thacke theyr houses.'' He recommends the practice of setting up corn in shocks, with two sheaves to cover eight, instead of ten sheaves as at present—probably owing to the straw being then shorter. The corn was commonly housed; but if there be a want of room, he advises that the ricks be built on a scaffold and not upon the ground. The fallow received a third ploughing in September, and was sown about Michaelmas. ``Wheat is moost commonlye sowne under the forowe, that is to say, cast it uppon the falowe, and then plowe it under''; and this branch of his subject is concluded with directions about threshing, winnowing and other kinds of barn-work.
Fitzherbert next proceeds to live stock. ``An housbande,'' he says, ``can not well thryue by his corne without he have other cattell, nor by his cattell without corne. And bycause that shepe, in myne opynyon, is the mooste profytablest cattell that any man can haue, therefore I pourpose to speake fyrst of shepe.'' His remarks on this subject are so accurate that one might imagine they came from a storemaster of the present day.
In some places at present ``they neuer seuer their lambes from their dammes''; ``and the poore of the peeke (high) countreye, and such other places, where, as they vse to mylke theyr ewes, they vse to wayne theyr lambes at 12 weekes olde, and to mylke their ewes fiue or syxe weekes''; but that, he observes, ``is greate hurte to the ewes, and wyll cause them that they wyll not take the ramme at the tvme of the yere for pouertye, but goo barreyne.'' ``In June is tyme to shere shepe; and ere they be shorne, they must be verye well washen, the which shall be to the owner greate profyte in the sale of his wool, and also to the clothe-maker.''
His remarks on horses, cattle, &c., are not less interesting; and there is a very good account of the diseases of each species, and some just observations on the advantage of mixing different kinds on the same pasture. Swine and bees conclude this branch of the work.
The author then points out the great advantages of enclosure; recommends ``quycksettynge, dychynge and hedgeyng''; and gives particular directions about settes, and the method of training a hedge, as well as concerning the planting and management of trees. Fitzherbert throws some light on the position of women in the agriculture of his day. ``It is a wyues occupation,'' he says, ``to wynowe all maner of cornes, to make malte, to washe and wrynge, to make heye, shere corne, and, in time of nede, to helpe her husbande to fyll the mucke wayne or dounge carte, dryue the ploughe, to loode heye, corne and suche other; and to go or ride to the market to sel butter, chese, mylke, egges, chekyns, capons, hennes, pygges, gese, and all maner of cornes.''
The Book of Surveying adds considerably to our knowledge of the rural economy of that age. ``Four maner of commens'' are described; several kinds of mills for corn and other purposes, and also ``quernes that goo with hand''; different orders of tenants, down to the ``boundmen,'' who ``in some places contynue as yet''; ``and many tymes, by colour thereof, there be many freemen taken as boundmen, and their lands and goods is taken from them.'' Lime and marl are mentioned as common manures, and the former was sometimes spread on the surface to destroy heath. Both draining and irrigation are noticed, though the latter but slightly. And the work concludes with an inquiry ``how to make a township that is worth XX. marke a yere, worth XX.li. a year,'' advocating the transition from communal or open field to individual or enclosure farming.
``It is undoubted, that to every townshyppe that standeth in tyllage in the playne countrey, there be errable landes to plowe and sowe, and leyse to tye or tedder theyr horses and mares upon, and common pasture to kepe and pasture their catell, beestes and shepe upon; and also they have medowe grounde to get their hey upon. Than to let it be known how many acres of errable lande euery man hath in tyllage, and of the same acres in euery felde to chaunge with his neyghbours, and to leve them toguyther, and to make hym one seuerall close in euery felde for his errable lands; and his leyse in euery felde to leve them togyther in one felde, and to make one seuerall close for them all. And also another seuerall close for his portion of his common pasture, and also his porcion of his medowe in a seuerall close by itselfe, and al kept in seureall both in wynter and somer; and euery cottage shall haue his portion assigned hym accordynge to his rent, and than shall nat the ryche man ouerpresse the poore man with his cattell; and euery man may eate his oun close at his pleasure. And vndoubted, that hay and strawe that will find one beest in the house wyll finde two beestes in the close, and better they shall lyke. For those beestis in the house have short heare and thynne, and towards March they will pylle and be bare; and therefore they may nat abyde in the fylde before the heerdmen in wintertyme for colde. And those that lye in a close under a hedge haue longe heare and thyck, and they will neuer pylle nor be bare: and by this reason the husbande maye keoe twyse so many catell as he did before.
``This is the cause of this approwment. Nowe euery husbande hath sixe seuerall closes, whereof iii. be for corne, the fourthe for his leyse, the fyfte for his commen pastures, and the sixte for his haye; and in wynter time there is but one occupied with corne, and than hath the husbande other fyue to occupiy tyll lente come, and that he hath his falowe felde, his ley felde, and his pasture felde al sommer. And when he hath mowen his medowe, then he hath his medowe grounde, soo that if he hath any weyke catell that wold be amended, or dyvers maner of catell, he may put them in any close he wyll, the which is a great advantage; and if all shulde lye commen, than wolde the edyche of the corne feldes and the aftermath of all the medowes be eaten in X. or XII. dayes. And the rych men that hath moche catell wold have the advantage, and the poore man can have no help nor relefe in wynter when he hath moste nede; and if an acre of lande be worthe sixe pens, or it be enclosed, it will be worth VIII. pens, when it is enclosed by reason of the compostying and dongyng of the catell that shall go and lye upon it both day and nighte; and if any of his thre closes that he hath for his corne be worne or ware bare, than he may breke and plowe up his close that he hadde for his layse, or the close that he hadde for his commen pasture, or bothe, and sowe them with corne, and let the other lye for a time, and so shall he have always reist grounde, the which will bear moche corne with lytel donge; and also he shall have a great profyte of the wod in the hedges whan it is growen; and not only these profytes and advantages beforesaid, but he shall save moche more than al these, for by reason of these closes he shall save meate, drinke and wages of a shepherde, the wages of the heerdmen, and the wages of the swine herde, the which may fortune to be as chargeable as all his holle rente; and also his corne shall be better saved from eatinge or destroyeng with catel. For dout ye nat but heerdemen with their catell, shepeherdes with their shepe, and tieng of horses and mares, destroyeth moch corne, the which the hedges wold save. Paraduenture some men would say that this shuld be against the common weale, bicause the shepeherdes, heerdmen and swyne-herdes shuld than be put out of wages. To that it may be answered. though these occupations be not used, there be as many newe occupations that were not used before; as getting of quicke settes. diching, hedging and plashing, the which the same men may use and occupye.''
The next author who writes professedly on agriculture is Thomas Tusser, whose Five Hundred Points of Husbandry, published in 1562, enjoyed such lasting repute that in 1723 Lord Molesworth recommended that it should be taught in schools. In it the book of husbandry consists of 118 pages, and then follows the Point of Housewifrie, occupying 42 pages more. It is written in verse. Amidst much that is valueless there are some useful notices concerning the state of agriculture at the time in different parts of England. Hops, which had been introduced in the early part of the 16th century, and on the culture of which a treatise was published in 1574 by Reginald Scott, are mentioned as a well-known crop. Buckwheat was sown after barley. Hemp and flax are mentioned as common crops. Enclosures must have been numerous in some counties; and there is a very good comparison between ``champion (open fields) country and several,'' which Blith afterwards transcribed into his Improver Improved. Carrots, cabbages, turnips and rape, not yet cultivated in the fields, are mentioned among the herbs and roots for the kitchen. There is nothing to be found in Tusser about serfs or bondmen, as in Fitzherbert's works.
In 1577 appeared the Foure Bookes of Husbandry, translated, with augmentation, from the work of Conrad Heresbach. Much stress is laid on the value of manure, and mention is made of clover.
Fitzherbert, in deploring the gradual discontinuance of the practice of marling land, had alluded to the grievance familiar in modern times of tenants ``who, if they should marl and make their holdings much better, fear lest they should be put out, or make a great fine or else pay more rent.'' This subject is treated at length in Sir John Norden's Surveyor's Dialogue (1st ed. 1607), the next agricultural work demanding notice. The author, writing from the landowner's point of view, ascribes the rise in rents and the rise in the price of corn4 to the ``emulation'' of tenants in competing for holdings, a practice implying that the agriculture of the period was prosperous. Norden's work contains many judicious observations on the ``different natures of grounds, how they may be employed, how they may be bettered, reformed and amended.'' The famous meadows near Salisbury are mentioned, where, when cattle have fed their fill, hogs, it is said, ``are made fat with the remnant—namely, with the knots and sappe of the grasse.'' ``Clouer grasse, or the grasse honey suckle'' (white clover), is directed to be sown with other hay seeds. ``Carrot rootes'' were then raised in several parts of England, and sometimes by farmers. London street and stable dung was carried to a distance by water, and appears from later writers to have been got for the trouble of removing. Leases of 21 years are recommended for persons of small capital as better than employing it in purchasing land. The works of Gervase Markham, Leonard Mascall, Gabriel Plattes and other authors of the first half of the 17th century may be passed over, the best part of them being preserved by Blith and Hartlib, who are referred to below.
Sir Richard Weston's Discourse on the Husbandry of Brabant and Flanders was published by Hartlib in 1645, and its title indicates the source to which England owed much of its subsequent agricultural advancement. Weston was ambassador from England to the elector palatine in 1619, and had the merit of being the first who introduced the Great Clover, as it was then called, into English agriculture, about 1652, and probably turnips also. Clover thrives best, he says, when you sow it on the barrenest ground, such as the worst heath ground in England. The ground is to be pared and burnt, and unslacked lime must be added to the ashes. It is next to be well ploughed and harrowed; and about 10 lb. of clover seed must be sown on an acre in April or the end of March. If you intend to preserve seed, then the second crop must be let stand till it come to a full and dead ripeness, and you shall have at the least five bushels per acre. Being once sown, it will last five years; the land, when ploughed, will yield, three or four years together, rich crops of wheat, and after that a crop of oats, with which clover seed is to be sown again. It is in itself an excellent manure, Sir Richard adds; and so it should be, to enable land to bear this treatment. Before 1655 the culture of clover, exactly according to the present method, seems to have been well known in England, and it had also made its way to Ireland.
A great many works on agriculture appeared during the time of the Commonwealth, of which Walter Blith's Improver Improved and Samuel Hartlib's Legacie are the most valuable. The first edition of the former was published in 1649, and of the latter in 1651; and both of them were enlarged in subsequent editions. In the first edition of the Improver Improved no mention is made of clover, nor in the second of turnips, but in the third, clover is treated of at some length, and turnips are recommended as an excellent cattle crop, the culture of which should be extended from the kitchen garden to the field. Sir Richard Weston must have cultivated turnips before this; for Blith says that Sir Richard affirmed to himself that he fed his swine with them. They were first given boiled, but afterwards the swine came to eat them raw, and would run after the carts, and pull them forth as they gathered them—an expression which conveys an idea of their being cultivated in the fields.
Blith's book is the first systematic work in which there are some traces of alternate husbandry or the practice of interposing clover and turnip between culmiferous crops. He is a great enemy to commons and common fields, and to retaining land in old pasture, unless it be of the best quality. His description of the different kinds of ploughs is interesting; and he justly recommends such as were drawn by two horses (some even by one horse) in preference to the weighty and clumsy machines which required four or more horses or oxen. The following passage indicates the contemporary theory of manuring:—-``In thy tillage are these special opportunities to improve it, either by liming, marling, sanding, earthing, mudding, snayl-codding, mucking, chalking, pidgeons-dung, hens-dung, hogs-dung or by any other means as some by rags, some by coarse wool, by pitch marks, and tarry stuff, any oyly stuff, salt and many things more, yea indeed any thing almost that hath any liquidness, foulness, saltness or good moysture in it, is very naturall inrichment to almost any sort of land.'' Blith speaks of an instrument which ploughed, sowed and harrowed at the same time; and the setting of corn was then a subject of much discussion. Blith was a zealous advocate of drainage and holds that drains to be efficient must be laid 3 or 4 ft. deep. The drainage of the Great Level of the Fens was prosecuted during the 17th century, but lack of engineering skill and the opposition of the fen-men hindered the reclamation of a now fertile region.
Hartlib's Legacie contains, among some very judicious directions, a great deal of rash speculation. Several of the deficiencies which the writer complains of in English agriculture must be placed to the account of climate, and never have been or can be supplied. Some of his recommendations are quite unsuitable to the state of the country, and display more of general knowledge and good intention than of either the theory or practice of agriculture. Among the subjects deserving notice may be mentioned the practice of steeping and liming seed corn as a preventive of smut; changing every year the Species of grain, and bringing seed corn from a distance; ploughing down green crops as manure; and feeding horses with broken oats and chaff. This writer seems to differ a good deal from Blith about the advantage of interchanging tillage and pasture. ``It were no losse to this island,'' he says, ``if that we should not plough at all, if so be that we could certainly have corn at a reasonable rate, and likewise vent for all our manufactures of wool''; and one reason for this is, that pasture employs more hands than tillage, instead of depopulating the country, as was commonly imagined. The Grout, which he mentions as ``coming over to us in Holland ships,'' about which he desires information, was probably the same as shelled barley; and mills for manufacturing it were introduced into Scotland from Holland towards the beginning of the 18th century.
Among the other writers previous to the Revolution mention must be made of John Ray the botanist and of John Evelyn, both men of great talent and research, whose works are still in high estimation.
The first half of the 17th century was a period of agricultural activity, partly due, no doubt, to the increase of enclosed farms. Marling and liming are again practised, new agricultural implements and manures introduced, and the new crops more widely used. But the Civil War and the subsequent politicaldisturbances intervened to prevent the continuance of this progress, and the agriculture of the end of the century seems to have relapsed into stagnation.
Scottish agriculture of the 17th century.
Of the state of agriculture in Scotland in the 16th and the greater part of the 17th century very little is known; no professed treatise on the subject appeared till after the Revolution. The south-eastern counties were the earliest improved, and yet in 1660 their condition seems to have been very wretched. Ray, who made a tour along the eastern coast in that year, says, ``We observed little or no fallow ground in Scotland; some ley ground we saw, which they manured with sea wreck. The men seemed to be very lazy, and may be frequently observed to plough in their cloaks. It is the fashion of them to wear cloaks when they go abroad, but especially on Sundays. They have neither good bread, cheese nor drink. They cannot make them, nor will they learn. Their butter is very indifferent, and one would wonder how they could contrive to make it so bad. They use much pottage made of coal-wort, which they call kail, sometimes broth of decorticated barley. The ordinary country-houses are pitiful cots, built of stone and covered with turfs, having in them but one room, many of them no chimneys, the windows very small holes and not glazed. The ground in the valleys and plains bear very good corn, but especially bears barley or bigge, and oats, but rarely wheat and rye.''
It is probable that no great change had taken place in Scotland from the end of the 15th century, except that tenants gradually became possessed of a little stock of their own, instead of having their farm stocked by the landlord. ``The minority of James V., the reign of Mary Stuart, the infancy of her son, and the civil wars of her grandson Charles I., were all periods of lasting waste. The very laws which were made during successive reigns for protecting the tillers of the soil from spoil are the best proofs of the deplorable state of the husbandman.''5
In the 17th century those laws were made which paved the way for an improved system of agriculture in Scotland. By a statute of 1633 landholders were enabled to have their tithes valued, and to buy them either at nine or six years' purchase, according to the nature of the property. The statute of 1685, conferring on landlords a power to entail their estates, was indeed of a very different tendency in regard to its effects on agriculture. But the two Acts in 1695, for the division of commons and separation of intermixed properties, facilitated improvements.
Progress of agriculture from 1688 to 1760.
From the Revolution to the accession of George III. the progress of agriculture was by no means so considerable as might be imagined from the great exportation of corn. It is probable that very little improvement had taken place, either in the cultivation of the soil or in the management of live stock, from the Restoration down to the middle of the 18th century. Clover and turnips were confined to a few districts, and at the latter period were scarcely cultivated at all by common farmers in the northern part of the island. Of the writers of this period, therefore, it is necessary to notice only such as describe some improvement in the modes of culture, or some extension of the practices that were formerly little known.
In John Houghton's Collections on Husbandry and Trade, a periodical work begun in 1681, there is one of the earliest notices of turnips being eaten by sheep:——``Some in Essex have their fallow after turnips, which feed their sheep in winter, by which means the turnips are scooped, and so made capable to hold dews and rain water, which, by corrupting, imbibes the nitre of the air, and when the shell breaks it runs about and fertilizes. By feeding the sheep, the land is dunged as if it had been folded; and those turnips, though few or none be carried off for human use, are a very excellent improvement, nay, some reckon it so, though they only plough the turnips in without feeding.'' This was written in February 1694. Ten years before, John Worlidge, one of his correspondents, and the author of the Systema Agriculturae (1669), observes, ``Sheep fatten very well on turnips, which prove an excellent nourishment for them in hard winters when fodder is scarce; for they will not only eat the greens, but feed on the roots in the ground, and scoop them hollow even to the very skin. Ten acres (he adds) sown with clover, turnips, &c., will feed as many sheep as one hundred acres thereof would before have done.''