Gloucester
pavage and murage in the time of Edward III
Niall
C.E.J. O’Brien
On 28th
December 1328 King Edward III granted a reconfirmation of all previous grants
of liberties to the burgesses of Gloucester, even those liberties rarely used
or not used at all. The grant specially confirmed that no burgess shall plead
outside the walls of Gloucester except when related to outside tenures. The
burgesses were also granted to be quit of “murage, quayage, pavage, passage,
gildage and Merchant’s Guild” and all other customs throughout the whole
kingdom. This royal charter was especially to honour the body of the late King
Edward II who was buried in Gloucester.[1]
King
Edward II died at Berkeley Castle on 27th September 1327 after he
was deposed by his wife and her lover (Queen Isabella and Roger Mortimer), possibly
murdered, although some claimed he moved to France and lived as an ordinary
person for many years. The government of King Edward III (operated by Queen
Isabella and Roger Mortimer) spent about ten days in Gloucester in December
1328 before moving on to Christmas at Worcester.[2]
Aerial view of modern Gloucester
Pavage
The first grant of
pavage given to Gloucester that I have found was made on 29th April
1321 chargeable on all goods brought into the town. This grant was for four
years.[3] It
is presumed that the town authorises collected the dues and improved the street
paving. Another presumption is that the streets were cleansed of dung, dirt and
putridity during the term of the grant but this is not stated in the letters
patent. The pavage grant to Dublin in 1366 mentioned this requirement.[4]
Presumingly Gloucester had a good reputation for clean streets and so it didn’t
need to be told.
On 7th March
1327 another grant of pavage was made for five years.[5] On
26th July 1331 King Edward III granted pavage to Gloucester for a
four year term.[6]
The amount due on the various goods coming into Gloucester is not stated for
the grants of 1321 and 1331. But we do have an extensive list of goods and
their custom charge available when the 1331 grant was renewed in 1335.
On 24th
February 1335 King Edward III granted to the burgesses of Gloucester that to
aid in the paving of the town they could collect dues on a whole range of goods
coming into the own for the following seven years.[7] About
a hundred years later, on 28th October 1434 King Henry VI made
another grant pavage to Gloucester, this time for five years.[8] Other
grants of pavage were made at other times but the type of goods charged and
their rate of custom is unknown.[9] The
goods and the rate of custom of the 1335 grant were as follows [the 1434 rate
is in bold type if different]:[10]
Each load of corn, ½d
(d = pence)
Each horse, mare, ox or
cow, 1d [half pence]
Each hide of a horse,
mare, ox or cow, fresh, salted or tanned, 1d [quarter pence]
Each cart carrying
salted meat, 2d [one penny]
Five salted pigs, 1d [half pence]
Six hams, ½d
A fresh salmon, ½d
A dozen of shad, 1d
Each lamprey before
Easter, 1d [half pence]
A hundred sheep-skins
with the wool on, goat-skins, deer-skins, 1d [half pence]
Each hundred of
lamb-skins, kid-skins, hare-skins, rabbit-skins, fox-skins, cat-skins and
squirrel-skins, ½d
Each cartload of salt,
1d
Each load of salt by
week, 1d
Each load of cloth, 1d
[half pence]
Each whole cloth, 1d
Each hundred of linen
cloth, canvas and Irish cloth, Galway
cloth and Worstede cloth, 1d [half
pence] [the hundred of canvas or cloth contained 120 ells and each ell was
about 45 inches]
Each cloth of silk with
gold of samite (a rich silken stuff), diaper and baudekly (a gold-emroided
cloth named from Bagdad), 1d [half pence]
Each cloth of silk or
gold or chief of sandal afforced (a fine stuff of silk or linen), ½d [quarter pence]
Each ship coming to the
town by the Severn charged with goods for sale, 4d [one penny]
Each dole of wine and
ashes (a crude tartar obtained from wine-lees), 2d [1½ pence]
Each load of ashes, ½d
Each load of honey, 1d
Each barrel of honey,
4d
Each sack of wool, 4d
Each trussel of cloth
brought by cart, 4d [two pence] [a
trussel was a package or bale of cloth from the Old French trusser to pack]
Each load of cloth and
other small things, ½d
Each cartload of iron,
1d
Each load of iron, ½d
Each cartload of lead,
2d
Each load of bark by
week, ¼d
Merchandize sold by
weight, of the hundred, 1d, [usually small wares sold by weight]
Of a peis (Old French
for weight) of tallow and fat, 1d,
Of a quarter of woad,
2d
Of each hundred of alum
and copperas, ½d
Of two thousands of
onions, ¼d
A load of garlic, ½d
A thousand of herrings,
½d
Of a hundred of bord,
½d [an Eastern fabric from Egypt]
Each quern, ½d
A thousand shingles, 1d
A thousand lathes, 1d
A new cart, ½d
A cartload of green
timber, ½d
A hundred of faggots,
½d [one penny]
A ship loaded with hay
coming to the town, 1d
Of each peis of cheese
and butter, 1d [half pence]
A dozen loads of coal
coming by water, ½d
Of two thousand nails
of all sorts except cart-nails, ¼d
A thousand nails for
the ridges of houses, ¼d
A hundred of iron for horses
(horse shoes) and clouts for carts, ½d [clouts were pieces of iron bound round
the ends of the axle=trees to protect them against wear]
Each trussel of
merchandize exceeding the value of 2s (s = shillings), ¼d
A cauldron for brewing,
1d
A cartload of sea-fish,
2d [half pence]
A load of sea-fish, ½d
A bale of Cordovan
leather and basan leather, 2d
A hundred of tin,
brass, or copper, 2d
A boatload of brushwood
or timber, 2d
A boatload of chalk, 1d
A boatload of sea-coal,
1d[11]
Comparison
with other cities
The rates of custom
payable on the various commodities levied at Gloucester were similar to other
cities but also different. The grant of pavage to Dublin in 1346 included a
quarter penny on a load of corn (half pence at Gloucester), a ship of sea-coal
was two pence (one penny at Gloucester), two thousand onions were half penny in
Dublin versus a quarter penny at Gloucester while herrings were a quarter pence
at Dublin but a half pence at Gloucester. Items levied at the same rate
included woad, nails and rabbit skins and others skins.[12]
The economy of every
town was different. The availability of each commodity and the desire of the
city authorities to encourage some trade over other commodities may account for
the differences. Even within a town the rates could be different as we shall
see with the murage grant given to Gloucester in 1345.
A map of the walls in red and the main streets and sites of Gloucester
Murage
On 1st
October 1345 King Edward III granted to the Bailiffs and men of Gloucester the
right to take custom from goods for sale coming to Gloucester by land, and by
water, for the following seven years. This grant of murage was to aid in the
repairing and sustentation of the town walls.[13] In
1298 and 1302 records relate to the bringing of stone by way of the River
Severn from Elmore for use for the town walls.[14]
The rate of murage was
sometime half that of pavage while on other commodities it was the same rate.
The type of goods charges for murage sometimes differed from that of pavage.
The following were the rates for murage on the goods coming into Gloucester for
sale:
Each horse load of corn for sale, whatsoever
kind it may be, or of malt, ¼d (d = pence)
Each horse, mare, ox or
cow, ½d
Each dole of wine, 2d
Each pipe of wine, 1d
Each hide of a horse,
mare, ox or cow, fresh, salted or tanned, ¼d
Five salted pigs, ½d
Ten hams, ½d
Ten sheep, goats and
hogs, 1d
Ten fleeces, ½d
A hundred sheep-skins
with the wool on, goat-skins, deer-skins, 1d
Each hundred of
lamb-skins, kid-skins, hare-skins, rabbit-skins, fox-skins, cat-skins and
squirrel-skins, ½d
Each hundred of
gray-work, 6d [furriery made of the skins of the animal known in Old French as gris]
Each quarter of salt,
¼d
Each horse-load of
cloth, ½d
Each whole cloth of the
value of 40s (s = shillings), 1d
Each trussel of cloth
brought by cart, 3d
Each hundred of cloth
worsted, 2d
Each cloth of worsted
called “couerlyt” of the value of 40s, 1d
Each hundred of linen
cloth of Dilesham (near Worstead, Norfolk), 1d
Each chief of cendalle
afforced, 1d
Of other cendalle, ½d
Each hundred of salted
cod [green fish] or stock-fish, 2d
Each cartload of fish,
½d
Each horse-load of
sea-fish, ½d
Each salmon, ¼d
Each dozen of lampreys,
1d
Each barrel of sturgeon,
½d
Each last of herrings,
6d
Each horse-load of
ashes, ½d
Each horse-load of
honey, 1d
Each sack of wool, 2d
Each cart-load of tan
by week, 1d
Merchandize sold by
weight, of the hundred, 1d,
Of each peis of tallow
and grease, 1d,
Of a quarter of woad,
2d
Of two thousands of
onions, ½d
Each bale of cordwain,
3d
Of a hundred of bord,
½d
Each quern, ½d
Each hundred of
faggots, ¼d
Each thousand of
turves, ¼d
A cart-load of
brushwood or timber, by the week, ½d
Each hundred [weight]
of tin, brass or copper, 2d
Each boat laden with
ale, brushwood, turbes, or any other things whatsoever for sale exceeding the
value of 20s, 1d
Each trussel of
merchandize of any kind exceeding the value of 10s, ½d
Each ware not named
here of the value of 5s and over, ¼d
The
walls of Gloucester
The earliest mention of
the walls of Gloucester that I have found was in a royal charter of King John
of gifts and liberties to the town of Gloucester in return for a fee farm
payment of £55. In that charter the burgesses of Gloucester Merchant Guild
should not “plead without the walls of the borough … except pleas relating to
outside tenures”.[15]
Yet Gloucester is noted for its older walls. Originally Gloucester was founded
as a town by the Romans with the usual forum buildings and military and
religious buildings. After the Roman Empire left the town fell into decline and
was abandoned for a number of centuries. Sometime round 900 AD the Anglo-Saxons
built a new town on a regular grid of streets within the Roman walls. But this
new town didn’t following the grid street system of the Roman town except that
the principal East-West street was near each other.[16]
The walls of
Gloucester, or any town, were not just for defence from attacking armies. In times
of war the walls did serve that purpose but on a daily basis the walls serve
more practical needs. It a time without an established police force the walls
and gates of a town helped control the free flow of criminals. When the gates
closed at night the town folk were safe from criminals from outside. Equally
criminals inside he own could not make a quick escape.
The walls also
controlled trade. Merchants had to use the town gates for access and couldn’t
avoid tolls and customs by jumping the fence with their goods for sale. The
walls also provided civil pride as only a town or city with money could afford
to pay for the erection of walls.
Benefits
of pavage and murage
What benefits did the
grants of pavage and murage bring to Gloucester and to others? On a positive
view the grants helped pave the streets and repair the town walls. But the
tolls fell heavily upon rural dwellers as the tolls only applied to goods
coming into town for sale. Goods within the town did not pay. Yet there were
few goods coming into Gloucester that were free of the tolls. One would think
therefore that the town acquired a large sum of money from pavage and murage
but evidence for other places would not support this.
Exeter received grants
of pavage and murage from 1224 to 1374 on a vast amount of goods coming into
the city for sale. In 1306/7 the income on these tolls was £40 per year. But
after the Black Death and the start of the Hundred Years War trade declined. The
returns in the 1360s and 1370s rarely exceeded £6 per year. In 1377 a new
system of murage was introduced at Exeter which was levied on resident property
holders rather than on traders. This new murage levy brought in £28 per year.[17]
Another factor which
limited the income from pavage and murage was the system of borough freedom
granted to individuals in various towns and cities. Not only were these people
free of most custom tolls within their own town but they were also exempt in
other recognised towns across England. The nationwide exemption granted to Gloucester
in 1328 was cited as reason for other cities to have such freedom for its
burgesses. In 1474 the burgesses of Waterford claimed exemption “just as the
burgesses of Gloucester are” exempted. These exemption extended to that of
pavage and murage. Most town halls kept a list of the other recognised towns so
as to properly collect tolls and not accidently collect from a person with
borough freedom, less they have to give the money back.[18]
In other cases unfranchised
inhabitants, and those from outside the town, paid an annual payments to cover
all market tolls and charges. These payments varied between 6 pence and 1 mark
but were usually in the range of 1–2 shillings range.[19]
The payment was reassessed each year but if it is possible that a trader could
save on taxes such as pavage and murage with the one big payment if he did substantial
trading in the town.
The amount of money
raised by pavage and murage was also limited by the size of the Gloucester
economic area. The borough rolls show that the villages from which men came
regularly to trade in Gloucester's market lay within a relatively small
surrounding area of the Vale and Severnside, most of them within or close to
the well-known limit of 6½ miles which was the usual distance for those
attending a day's market. Beyond this distance other market towns like
Tewkesbury, Cirencester, Painswick and Minchinhampton drew their own catchment
area.[20]
To these exemptions,
and limitations to the revenue generated for pavage and murage, must go the tax
avoidance activities of various people. Some of the earliest records to survive
from ancient history are government tax documents and following on close behind
are other documents showing people’s opposition to taxation or activities to
avoid paying tax. It is little different in our time. In medieval times tax
avoidance and evasion were ongoing issues. In 1273 a man living in Barton
Street was said to intercept and buy leather from those coming through the
suburb on their way to the market.[21] It
is possible that some of this trading outside the town boundary happened in the
period of pavage and murage.
Cistercian monk in a mediaeval abbey ruin
The wealthy people of
today and big corporations have a name of using off shore tax havens to avoid tax.
Some of the large corporations of medieval times also used tax havens. The
Cistercians usually had their abbey far out in the countryside but also
possessed a few town properties. C.H. Berman noted that “The French archives
show that Cistercian abbeys sought numerous commercial rights and properties in
those centres most conveniently located for their trade. Commercial rights or
preferences were gained through exemptions from tolls and taxes allowing the
order to move animals and goods toll-free to urban centres and once there to
buy and sell without paying market taxes” [such as pavage and murage]. Berman
says that this practice of pretending to bring goods into a town for the order’s
own use and once inside the town, selling the goods was common practice for the
Cistercians in France and England.[22]
In 1455 it was
estimated that about 8 per cent of properties within Gloucester were owned by
non-residents, mainly abbots and priors of the surrounding region. Yet an
institution like Llanthony priory, just outside the own walls, held about 10
per cent of town properties.[23] In
1392 the town bailiffs complained against Llanthony Priory concerned a doorway
that the priory maintained near St. Kyneburgh's chapel; by means of it, many
traders entered without paying toll.[24]
Conclusion
Medieval towns were as
complex and dramatic as any modern town. The many grants of pavage given to
Gloucester shows a determined effort by the town authorises to have functioning
streets to serve the many needs of its residents. The construction and repair
of the town wall shows civic pride and the clear determination of boundaries
and authority. The grants of pavage and murage also show how medieval towns
had, in ways, more local revenue generating capacity than modern towns which rely
on central government for much of their revenue and we are supposed to be the
progressive, modern age – the medieval world was not all medieval.
====================
End of post
====================
[1]
W.H. Stevenson (ed.), Calendar of the
Records of the Corporation of Gloucester (Gloucester, 1893), pp. 11, 12
[2] Calendar Patent Rolls, Edward III, 1327-1330,
pp. 194, 195, 196
[3] Calendar Patent Rolls, Edward II, 1317-1321,
p. 578
[4]
John T. Gilbert (ed.), Calendar of
Ancient Records of Dublin (Joseph Dollard, Dublin, 1889), vol. 1, p. 24
[5] Calendar Patent Rolls, Edward III, 1327-1330,
p. 57
[6] Calendar Patent Rolls, Edward III, 1330-1334,
p. 163
[7]
W.H. Stevenson (ed.), Calendar of the
Records of the Corporation of Gloucester, p. 50
[8]
W.H. Stevenson (ed.), Calendar of the
Records of the Corporation of Gloucester, pp. 57, 58, 59
[9] Calendar Patent Rolls, Richard II, 1381-1385,
p. 328 = 16th November 1383; Ibid,
Henry IV, 1402, p. 172 = 17th November 1401-1405; Ibid, Henry IV, 1405-1408, p. 91 = 12th
November 1405
[10]
W.H. Stevenson (ed.), Calendar of the
Records of the Corporation of Gloucester, pp. 50-2
[11]
W.H. Stevenson (ed.), Calendar of the
Records of the Corporation of Gloucester, pp. 50-2
[12]
John T. Gilbert (ed.), Calendar of
Ancient Records of Dublin, vol. 1, p. 16
[13]
W.H. Stevenson (ed.), Calendar of the
Records of the Corporation of Gloucester, p. 54
[15]
W.H. Stevenson (ed.), Calendar of the
Records of the Corporation of Gloucester, p. 6
[16]
C.M. Heighway & J.F. Rhodes, ‘St. Michael’s Church, Gloucester: A
Reconsideration of the Excavations of 1956’, in Joseph Bettey (ed.), Archives & Local History in Bristol
& Gloucester: Essays in Honour of David Smith (Bristol &
Gloucestershire Archaeological Society, 2007), p. 161, 165, 166
[17]
Maryanne Kowaleski, Local Markets and
Regional Trade in Medieval Exeter (Cambridge University Press, 1996), p.
195
[18]
Maryanne Kowaleski, Local Markets and
Regional Trade in Medieval Exeter, p. 201;
[22] Jason
Bolton, ‘The Cistercians at Rothe House’, in the Old Kilkenny Review, Volume 66 (2014), p. 37
[23] John
Langton, ‘Late medieval Gloucester: some data from a rental of 1455’, in Transactions of the Institute of British
Geographers, 1977, p. 269
No comments:
Post a Comment