The Countryside of Medieval England (review)

REVIEWS Astill, G. and A. Grant, eds, The Countryside of Medieval England, Oxford Basd Blackwell, 1988; pp. xii, 282; 50 ill.; R.R.P. A U S $122.50. This is a very useful collection of ten essays, five of them by the editors, on human, animal and plant resource exploitation and management in the English countryside from the late eleventh to the late fifteenth centuries. As such it brings together historians, archaeologists, and environmentalists in an exacting attempt to portray many of the more practical and physical aspects of rural life. Limitations of space prevent a detailed appreciation of all the contributions. Taken as a whole, however, their effect is to confirm many well-held views, such as the prevalence of regionalism, the high degree of social and geographical mobtiity, and the significance of c. 1300, rather than 1348, as a major turning point in the agrarian economy. They also serve to challenge and modify, and to raise points of conflict between historian and archaeologist, and the sub-species, archaeozoologist. Langdon's essay, in particular, challenges the long-held view] promoted by Duby, that iron was used increasingly in the manufacture of agricultural implements from the twelfth century onwards. According to Langdon, 'The use of iron during the medieval period seems to have been no more extensive than during the Roman period.' (p. 104) The tendency of the archaeologists amongst the contributors is to downplay medieval agricultural progress and productivity (see esp. pp. 107 and 178), whereas the historians acclaim the efficient use of resources in virtually all areas of activity - a reflection perhaps of the nature of the respective disciplines and the data at their disposal. O n the other hand, in the extension and improvement of setdement, including assarting activity, the archaeologists appear to champion the landlord, whereas the historians tend to recognise more the collective power of the peasants (p. 84). Needless to say, the book is a mine of detailed information on items of everyday life: on fuel, diet, domestic animals, even on medieval 'unlet paper'. Most of the essays appear to be written to a uniform plan demanding something of an introduction to the subject, a survey of the literature of the last two or three decades, work in progress, and a blueprint for the future. The opening and concluding chapters serve well to whet the appetite and to present in a fair and balanced way the achievements of the contributors. The twenty-six page bibliography, with its many references to works in press, in preparation, and forthcoming, together with the numerous 'pers. comm.' references in the text reflect the state-of-the art nature of the work as a whole and account for the tentativeness of many of the individual conclusions. However, two major omissions should be mentioned: Hilton's article on 'The Content and Sources of English Agrarian History before 1500', published in The Agricultural History 132 Reviews Review in 1955, remains one of the best introductions to the subject. It is also difficult to understand the omission of any reference to the works of Raftis, but especially his Assart Data and Land Values. Meanwhile, however, this volume will stand as a useful interim guide until the appearance of the second and third volumes of the Cambridge Agrarian History of England and Wales [Ed. note: vol. II has now been published]. John Walmsley Department of History Macquarie University Beilin, E.V., Redeeming Eve: Women writers of the English Renaissance, Princeton, Princeton U. P., 1987; pp. xxiv, 346; R.R.P. A U S $74.50. This is a welcome addition to the growing body of literature on women writers in the early modern period. In recent years, there have been detailed studies of individuals such as Aphra Behn by Angeline Goreau and by Sara Mendelson, of Mary Astell by Brigid Hill and by Ruth Perry, and reprints of texts, such as those by Mahn and Koon, and Henderson and McManus. Beilin, a literary scholar, is sensitive to historical context and her work is accessible lo historians. She eschews the simplicities of arguing that women were oppressed in the past or that their subjugation was more theoretical than real. She seeks to show...