Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JennyHallu
and who cares if A let his land lie fallow? It's his decision. Perhaps he hadn't the hands to work it himself, but was planning to send the field as his daughter's dowry when she wed. Perhaps the land had been poorly stewarded and overworked by a previous owner, and needed to lie fallow for more time. Perhaps the man wished to put cattle on it, but was saving his money to purchase the livestock. The Rohirrim are not serfs, are they?
|
Well, from a medieval point of view... Eodwine would care. King Eomer would care.
IF Farmer A had other plans/reasons for letting the land lie fallow, then that would obviously affect Eodwine's decision- but from what we know, there's no such evidence as yet.
The Rohirrim weren't serfs, or so I would hazard, but they ARE being given a VERY Anglo-Saxon feel, and in that period of history, the land belonged to King -all of it-, and was held by his vassals, the Eorls. Depending on the size of the Earldom (or the Emnet), there would possibly be another layer of lords beneath the Eorl, who would hold the land as his vassals. Finally would be the final layer of vassals- the farmers, or landholders. I don't think they'd necessarily be serf. A serf is tied to the land, whereas it would seem to me that the Rohirrim had physical mobility within their class.
But, as I said, the land was NOT the property of the farmer alone. As a vassal, he is it's owner under Eodwine, and subject to him, just as Eodwine is beneath and subject to Eomer. And Eodwine not only holds the right to command obedience from his vassals, but has the obligation to his subjects to provide for them as well- and that means that all land not currently in its fallow year ought to have been planted, if normally used for cropland.
Again, if there ARE extenuating circumstances, as you have suggested there may be, then that obviously changes things up. And, obviously, Eodwine (meaning LMP) gets to make the final decision, and none of us commentators. But it IS fun to speculate.
