I think that Matt gave some good answers on the various ways of controlling the beasts, particularly the little ones that are always the worst for adventuring. Having seen items for hurdles in inventories, I tend to agree about this solution in temporary penning in various parts as the hurdles could be removed and taken to wherever the cattle needed to graze next. Sheep may have been more difficult as they can jump quite high. I don't know if it made the national news a few years ago but those putting fences along the M62 to keep sheep off the road held sheep-jumping trials to see how high the fences needed to be. The result was some fairly high fences. Cows and calves tend to barge their way through. When it came to horses around our way in the 17th century, it seems that these were more like the Range Rover or the Ferrari of their times. Only the more wealthy had them and particularly those for riding were highly valued and mostly mares. I still have a vision of 'Little Boy Blue' suddenly being shook awake, blowing his horn and all the villagers come running with sticks and other implements to round up those awkward sheep and cows. At just what stage in the development of fields this may have happened or where abouts in the countryside, I haven't quite yet decided. Going from field names in the manor of Glossop in the 17th century it would seem to me that there had been some sort of open field system operating on that manor but the smaller manors on its boundaries don't seem to show similar signs. Unfortunately, neither is there similar information in the form of a very convenient survey made in the 1660s for Glossop. More research is about to be undertaken on these parts so perhaps we'll find something else that will contribute. Regarding the dimensions of strips - I have been told that these varied and the larger ones are the most recent - some as late as the 19th century. The large ones, however, were more a method draining the land. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eve McLaughlin" <eve@varneys.demon.co.uk> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 12:37 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] Common vs Open > In message <BAY14-DAV17dWfFMVpH00012150@hotmail.com>, David Pott > <davpott@hotmail.com> writes > >Hello Audrey > > > >> However, I would like to know if there is evidence of the meadows being > >> enclosed in some way to stop cattle from getting on to the part of land > >that > >> was growing winter fodder > > > >There were very few if any herds of cattle, nor with the exception of sheep, > >any livestock farming as such until after the enclosures. > This is patently wrong, if you study inventories taken in summer, which > give detailed lists of all possessions including livestock. Farmers > could own numerous animals, (not in the American sense of huge wandering > herds, but sizeable numbers), and they certainly owned horses, oxen and > cows, as well as expendable bullocks. It is true that, while stores were > a permanent feature, many of them were killed and salted down for > winter, because of lack of enough fodder, which was one of the reasons > for applying for enclosures. > > What few animals > >that were kept would have been grazed on their owners land > But the whole point of this enquriy is that it refers to areas with the > openfield system, when the various famers did not normally HAVE grazing > land which was enclosed but instead the right to graze on common > pasture. The questions concerned how the little devils were kept off the > arable and the hay fields. > > -- > Eve McLaughlin > > Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians > Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > >