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. What few animals that were kept would have been grazed on their owners land or upon the common. That isn't to say the odd one didn't find its way to somewhere it shouldn't be. David Pott KFHS 8776 The Beaver Inn, Ashford, Kent. The Elmsted site http://members.lycos.co.uk/elmsted/index.html

Hi David and Eve et al I think it must have varied tremendously according to quite small localities. Around where I live on the edge of the High Peak, there are roads which give clues as to how some of the animals were managed, e.g. Lower Fold which is part of the A626. Regarding the keeping of several animals, I agree that most kept comparatively few in the 17th century for instance but there was a farmer that was clearly cattle farming to an extent. I forget just how many animals were in his possession but he did seem to be breeding them, even though he may have had to take the cows some distance to find the bull. The enclosure act wasn't obtained until near the end of the next century so he must have found a way of keeping his animals close to home. The act and the map that accompanied it gave plenty of detail on the waste and its enclosure but told more or less nothing about the way the rest of the land was managed, lower down. As not only was the river diverted at the end of the 18th century but a fair number of cotton mills were built with the necessary reservoirs to go with them so it's rather hard to assess just how the fields may have been in the smaller manors of our chapelry. In the Peak itself there are a number of signs of the old strips and the land around Taddington is ideal for showing how the three field system was managed there. It is, however, hard to generalise. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Pott" <davpott@hotmail.com> To: "norman.lee1" <norman.lee1@virgin.net>; <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2004 6:06 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] Common vs Open > 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. What few animals > that were kept would have been grazed on their owners land or upon the > common. That isn't to say the odd one didn't find its way to somewhere it > shouldn't be. > > David Pott > > KFHS 8776 > The Beaver Inn, Ashford, Kent. > > The Elmsted site http://members.lycos.co.uk/elmsted/index.html >

I was wondering how many cows the ordinary citizen would have at that time. It would seem to me that a family would have A cow for milk and a sheep or two for meat and wool and that would be about it. I would imagine somebody would have a bull, probably the Lord of the area, and charge for his services. Did they have pigs as well and goats? If they had pigs how were they kept? I don't know much about early times in England. Thanks, Ruth At 6:06 PM +0100 8/7/04, David Pott wrote: >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. What few animals >that were kept would have been grazed on their owners land or upon the >common. That isn't to say the odd one didn't find its way to somewhere it >shouldn't be. > >David Pott -- Ruth Barton mrgjb@sover.net Dummerston, VT