History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 1 (of 4)Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
History
History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 1 (of 4)
Lindsay, W. S. (William Schaw)
Commerce -- History; Shipping -- History; Steam navigation -- History
No determinate principle can now be discerned why such dues were
exacted, small towns being in many cases required to pay more than
others of double their size. In some places the taxes were paid in
produce or merchandise—as, for instance, at Gloucester, where, besides
36_l._ levied in toll, the inhabitants had to contribute twelve gallons
of honey, and one hundred iron rods to the king’s ships, together
with a few other petty customs. Again, Leicester had also to provide
honey, and twelve burgesses to supply the king’s army, and four horses
to carry arms and stores to London when any maritime expedition was
about to sail from the Thames. In Shrewsbury the king levied a tax
of ten shillings on the marriage of every maid, and twenty shillings
on that of every widow, besides numerous taxes upon the people in
the shape of services or customs; and in Hereford, the king had one
hundred and three tenants, including six blacksmiths, who performed
certain services in lieu of rents, while the burgesses had, among other
burdens, to provide “a bear, and six dogs for the bear.” At Sandwich,
forty thousand herrings were demanded for the use of the monks of the
neighbourhood.[524]
[Sidenote: State of the people at the time of the Conquest.]
In many places, the records of Domesday show that considerable portions
of the inhabitants were too poor to pay any taxes. Thus, in Norwich,
while six hundred and sixty-five are rated among the burgesses, there
are no less than four hundred and eighty heads of families who had no
means of contributing. Notices are also preserved of the number of
houses at that time in a state of decay or disuse: thus, at Winchester,
whole streets and many churches were in a state of ruin; in Thetford,
there were one hundred and twenty houses empty; in Ipswich, more than
three hundred and twenty-eight falling to decay. In Chester, once so
flourishing and so heavily taxed, there were, soon after the Conquest,
two hundred and five houses lying waste; while, in York, four hundred
houses were so much decayed, as to pay only one penny each, or even
less; five hundred and forty were waste, and paid nothing; and one
hundred and forty-five were occupied by Frenchmen, who were relieved
from the tax.
But while poverty and oppressive taxation ground down the masses of the
people, the nobles abandoned themselves to the excesses of gluttony,
drunkenness, and promiscuous concubinage, frequently not scrupling to
consign the objects of their lust, and even their own offspring, to
the miseries of slavery, for paltry sums of money to be squandered in
wretched folly. Learning was almost at as low an ebb as it had been at
the commencement of the reign of Alfred; while the middle classes, with
some, though few, exceptions, were, in many respects, no better than
the nobles, and trade and commerce languished and declined. Such was
the state of things in England when the Norman conqueror landed on its
shores.[525]
FOOTNOTES:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account