Medieval nobles probably wouldn’t measure prestige in acreage or income; that’s much more of an Early Modern/19th century thing (think Jane Austen, where members of the gentry are sized up as having or “being on” “four or five thousand a-year.”). Rather land would be described in looser, more traditional terms: a “goodly” or “well-stocked” manor or fiefdom, as a barony or a county or duchy, etc.
As to how they felt about the land itself, it’s a bit complicated in the Medieval era, because technically, nobles didn’t own the land itself but rather owned an “estate in land,” i.e various rights over that land. Then again, virtually no one owned land outright, with it being far more common for people to have various tenancies and sub-tenancies. So the land (apart from the land held by the lord directly as opposed to rented out) is less important than one’s rental income.
This changed rather dramatically beginning in the late Middle Ages, as statues like Quia Emptores gradually allowed for the easier sale and purchase of land, and as cash rents replaced feudal obligations – leading to the period known as “bastard feudalism.” Basically, as lords increasingly began to own land outright and pay for soldiers directly as opposed to giving away land for feudal service, all of the sudden the nobility has a much higher stake in land management, because the more cash you can get out of your estate, the more men you can pay to be part of your affinity.
So if you’re a nobleman with an eye for the coming thing, you’re going to hire some people to turn any wasteland you might own into productive land by draining fenland and the like, you’re going to support the enclosure movement to get your hands on the commons, you’re going to invest in modern farming techniques, and try to raise rents whenever and however you can.
RFTIT Tumblr Backup 