ABSTRACT
Medieval England possessed a plurality of commonfield systems: yet why this was so, like the related question of commonfield origins, awaits a satisfactory explanation. H. L. Gray was the first to identify and describe different commonfield systems, and he made their existence the keystone of his ethnic explanation of commonfield origins. The Midland system was certainly the most enduring of commonfield systems and for this reason is the system most fully represented in post-medieval sources. But in the fourteenth century, when commonfield fanning was most widespread, its pre-eminence was less well marked. On grounds of practicality, there are several reasons for doubting whether the co-ordination and systematisation of commonfields progressed quite as smoothly, and were quite so directly related to population growth, as the Thirsk model postulates. In contrast C.S. and C.S. Orwin, in their subsequent hypothesis of commonfield origins, paid little attention to regional variations in field systems and concentrated upon the regular commonfield system of the Midlands.
