T. THEON GIONAI)WEALT in Englind AS INDICATED in the 1' SUBSIDY RETUB1S 24/) Ubmitted by JOHN Sheath for the Degree of Doctor
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
:t. THEON GIONAI)WEALT IN ENGLiND AS INDICATED IN THE 1' SUBSIDY RETUB1S 24/) ubmitted by JOHN SHEATh for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. BIIL. L'j . -. UNIV. I' 1*! : 4 ',cY; '6t 'j'h'? E67 P A 'C)i - :,, .-:;--- ---1i)) t;w ? d $ irD 4,L1,, _)fl4I- ;1f iI;\ 4 I47 - 1'G"- '9, ___ 1ons4 -i-' _________ '. 4e1,v_1 .d"s "vt 'I V -'-i- > ________________________________________ '-I - 4# __________ _ j)i ,st L- 5' - 'Li 'I-, -4 ', U t..I8ruu rCr3 %(A1øIry'4*I -T: _____ "' i z) c'—V - I __rc\ a _____________________________________________ .______.___._-.-, U I 'r" t)'C3ui' / .L' 'I— 4,— , i-;,--- ____i 'i -, i — r) I 4Jd' ___ I 4 T1"1' Q__1 2. C0TENTS page Frontispiece Contents . • . • 2 Acknowledgment. • . • 4 Preface • • . • 6 Abstract • • . S • 7 PART I 8 Chapter 1. Introduction . 9 2. The making of the surveys 14 3. The measurement of wealth • 30 4. The number of payment. 45 5. The amounts paid in taxation in 1524/5 54 6. The ze11ability of the subsidies 67 7. The mapping of the surveys 82 8. Introduction to the Gazetteer . 90 PART II The distribution of the relative wealth and population of England 104 The distribution of the relative w4alth and population in the counties 138 Bedford.shire • • S 138 Berkshire . 142 Buckinghamshire 147 Cambridgeshire S 154 Cornwall . 162 Derbyshire . 167 Devonshire . 172 Dorset . 181 Essex . S 186 Gloucestershire . 193 Hampshire . 200 Rerefordshire . • . 208 Hertfordshire . a 213 Buntingdonshire . 218 lent . • . a 222 Lancashire . 229 Leiceatershire • • . 258 Lincoinshire . • 245 Middlesex . • . 4 253 Norfolk . • • . 258 Iorthamptonshire . 268 Jottinghamshire . S 275 Oxfordshire . 282 (continued) 3. page Rutland . S 291 Shrop shire . S . 294 Staffordshire . S 306 Suffolk . S . 313 Surrey . 323 Sussex . 329 Warwickshire S S 337 Wiltshire 345 Worcestershire . 354 Yorkshire - East Riding S . 359 North Riding . 367 West Riding . 374 PART III 383 The Gazetteer FIGURES Figure 1. S . 31 2. S . 38 3. .. 41 4. S . 49 5. S . 56 6. S 58 7. 59 8. S S . 61 9. S S 119 4. ACXBOWLEDGMEWPS Professor B.C. Darby- was my supervisor for the greater part of the time, and suggested the subsidy returns ma a topic for research. I am most grateful to him for his constant support and interest. Dr. R.E. Glasecock very kindly allowed me to Use the results of his research on the 1334 lay subsidy returns. I owe an enormous debt to Dr. R.S. Schofield who stimulated my interest in the subject and helped me over a multitude of problems. I acknowledge the very forceful encouragement given me by Mr. LC. Prince, especially in the early stages of this work. Professor W.R. Mead kindly offered the most valuable support in the preparation of the maps and. Mr. T.G. Hurst gave me permission to use the work of The Deserted Medieval Village Research Group. I have greatly appreciated the advice and interest of Professor LW. Beresford, whose help and support have been a strength for many years. Mr. P. Sheail spent very many hours helping to turn tables of figures into maps. The incuaion of such a large number of maps would have been impossible without the sietanoe of Mr. G.R. Tersey and Mr. K. Wass. Mr. C. Chromarty gave the best possible advice with respect to the photographic reduction and presentation of the maps. A 5. The typing of the thesis, especially in the short timeailable, has presented very great problems. I am deeply grateful to Mrs. 1.3. Maxted for her skill and infinite patience. Above all, I want to thank a place lled "Candovers" for a life-tim of constant encouragement and support in all that I have done, All the ill-conceived ideae and. many errors in this thesis are entirely my own. 6. PEPACE 1. The Public Record Office reference (E 179 .../..) is given for all documents included in the Gazetteex of Part III. Soke documents are also examined in Part I and Part II but the reference is not repeated. The Inclusion of footnotes would have considerablr extended th. length of the thesie and the PRO reference i1l be easily found in the Gazetteer. Chapter 8 of Part I introduces the Gazetteer. 2. Maps are of fundamental importance in this thesis - there are 108 pages of thea. It is assumed the reader will continuously refer to the appropriate maps. Chapter 7 of Part I introduces the series of maps in the thesis. 3. A list of relevant bibliographical references will be found at the end of each chapter and county section in the thesis. In the Gazetteer of Part III, it is assumed the reader will be familiar with the following workes LC. Darby and. others s The Domesday Geography of England R.E. Glaeecock; The distribution of lay wealth in south-east England In the early fourteenth century, Ph.D. thesis, London, (unpublished), 1963. The following abbreviations are used: V.C.H. refer. to the Tictoria History of the county which is under examination in the Gazetteer. E.P.I.S. refers to the English Place Name Society voluaies of the county which is under examination. 7. ABSTRACT The Lay Subsidy surveys were compiled in 1524 and 1525 and cover almost every county in England. The name of each taxpayer was recorded together with his level of wealth, and. this material can now be studied in the Public Record Office. This is the first time that each list in the two surveys has been analysed end compared with those of the remainder of the country. The distribution of regional wealth and population may be measured from the spread of taxation. Part I of the work examines the value of the lay subsidy surveys of 1524 and 1525 as source material for the historical geographer. Part II presents a summary of the national spread of wealth and population. This is followed by a brief account of the experience of each county included by the Act of Subsidy. The returns are analysed with the help of 108 pages of maps. Part III consists of a Gazetteer which summarises the contents of each extant membrane belonging to the lay subsidy and found in the Public Record Office today. 8. PART 1 TEE LAY SuBSIDY OF 1524 an 1525 9. CHAPTER 1. There were striking regional differences in the distribution of wealth and population in medieval England. Each county had its own range of diversitys the spread of men and money varied over short distances because the social and economic composition of England reflected features in the local landscape and. population. The medieval topographers were aware of this diversity and regionalism during their travels, but their records are not very illuminating. The sparsity of reference and the lack of detail in their observations may be illustrated by- the writings of Nicander Nucius. fle wrotes "And the whole island is diversified with fruitfull hills and plains and abounds with marshes and well-timbered oak forests; it has moreover woods and lakes near the sea". Eva Taylor (1936) made a systematic study of early Tudor England in "The Historical Geography of England before 1800". Examples and quotations were taken from the notes of John Leland, although this topographer could not possibly visit and record information from all parts of the land. His judgments were subjective, and for these reasons, Professor Tylora account lacks precision. For example, London is described as being three times as large as York, the next most important English city- - but there is no valid statistical evidence for this statement. A more reliable picture of England emerges through a statistical analysis of the lay subsidy returns of 1524/5. The subsidy was a 10. form of taxation paid by the laity of the country to the Crown. Men throughout the country compiled lists of people they considered capable of paying tax, and treated each community in the same way. The survey liste were deposited in the Exchequer so that they could. be audited and. stored. The distribution of wealth and. population can be measured. from these taxation payments drawn up in two years of the sixteenth century. The subsidy surveys may be used for another reason. Research is limited, by the localised nature of much source material, and it is often difficult to correlate studies made in diverse parts of the country. The East Anglian textile area, for instance, may be described as prosperous, but the statement has ery little meaning unless comparisons are drawn with other parts of the country. The textile centres of East Anglia and. the West Country should be compared. in detail aM only after this has been done can the riches of the Suffolk woollen towns be accurately assessed.. This broader form of approach can be achieved through the use of the lay subsi4 returns. The lists cover all the country - except Northumberland, Durham, Cumberland, Westmoand and Cheshire. Parts of the Welsh borderland were excluded because they were still in Wales, and the Cinque Ports and a few small centres were also omitted.. The full lay subsidy surveys cover nearly all of England, and give a standard measurement of the distribution of wealth and population. With this information, the diversity and. regionalism noticed by contemporaries can be better understood. In this present work, literary 11. sources are not used. In the future, it may be possible to complement the "mere facts and figures" of a tax survey with the note-takings of such topographers as John Leland. The lay subsidy returns have so far been considered within their Tudor context. They may have an even wider role to play in medieval research.