Convertible Husbandry vs. Regular Common Fields: A Model on the Relative Efficiency of Medieval Field Systems

Harry Kitsikopoulos

The Journal of Economic History, 2004, vol. 64, issue 2, 462-499

Abstract: The existing literature on the economy of medieval England views the practice of convertible husbandry as a more efficient alternative to regular common fields. The article challenges this view by measuring the productivities of the systems, which are found to be approximately equivalent. In interpreting this finding, it is suggested that edaphic conditions and wrongful managerial practices account for the poor performance of convertible husbandry during the Middle Ages, whereas the greater productivity achieved by the system in the early modern period is attributed to the introduction of fodder legumes, such as clover, which were absent in previous centuries.

Date: 2004
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/ ... type/journal_article link to article abstract page (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cup:jechis:v:64:y:2004:i:02:p:462-499_00

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in The Journal of Economic History from Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kirk Stebbing ().