Rewards
The regular pay of an esquire of the household was seven pence halfpenny a day.1 The pay of a King’s sergeant at arms was twelve pence a day—a sum usually granted for life.2 It is to be observed, however, that the sergeants-at-arms received very few other grants. The esquires, on the other hand, received extremely valuable grants in great numbers. In particular they were given annuities, grants of land, grants of office, custody of lands belonging to heirs under age, usually with marriage of the heir, and corrodies at monasteries.
Taking up the first of these I shall confine myself to the “esquiers” of 1368, since-from Chaucer’s position in the lists in that year and in 1369—they would seem to be the men with whom Chaucer is to be associated. In stating the amounts of the annuities I shall give the total sum which each man received. The names follow in the order of the lists of 1368.
Johan de Herlyng, L40, + L20 + L13,10s. 1d. + L12, 10s.3 Wauter Whithors, L40.4 Thomas Cheyne, L20.5 Johan de Beverle, L40; 8s. 9d.6 Johan de Romesey, L20.7 Wauter Walssh, L20. 7s Hugh Wake, L40.8 Roger Clebury, L10.9 Piers de Cornewaill, L40.10 Robert de Ferers, no annuity found. Elmyn Leget, 20m.11 Robert de Corby, L10.12 Collard Dabrichecourt, L10.13 Thomas Hauteyn, L10.14 Hugh Cheyne, 10m.15 Thomas Foxle—no information whatever.16 Geffrey Chaucer. Geffrey Stuele, L20.17 Simond de Burgh, L10 + 10m.18 Johan Tichemerssh—no information whatever.19 Robert la Souche, L10.20 Esmon Rose (and wife, Agnes Archer) 40m.21 Laurence Hauberk—no certain information as esquire. Griffith de la Chambre, L 20.22 Johan de Thorp, 10 m. 4, Raulyn Erchedeakne—no information whatever.23 Rauf de Knyveton, 10 m.24 Thomas Hertfordyngbury, L10.25 Hugh Strelley, 40 m.26 Hugh Lyngeyn, L20.27 Nicholas Prage, 10m.28 Richard Torperle, 12d. daily.29 Richard Wirle, no annuity. Johan Northrugge, 10m.30 Hanyn Narrett, L10.31 Simond de Bokenham, L10.32 Johan Legge, 12d. daily 1433
In only two cases in which we find other information about an esquire do we find no annuity. In a few cases, I have been able to find out nothing at all about the men. In all others, annuities ranging from ten marks up to L86 are found. Apparently then the receipt of an annuity was absolutely a normal feature of the career of an esquire.
None of the other forms of grants was given so systematically and uniformly as that of annuities, but all of the others were very common. The nature and extent of the grants of land, and of guardianships, will appear in the accounts of the careers of individual esquires. They are so irregular in their character, are changed so frequently and are given on such varying ‘conditions, that an accurate list could scarcely be made.
The matter of grants of offices, particularly in the customs, is, however, more easy to handle. At the time when Chaucer was given his controllership, offices in the customs seem to have been used regularly as sinecures for the esquires. In 1353 Griffith de la Chambre was granted the office of gauging of wine in the towns of Lenn and Great Yarmouth.34 At the same time Roger Clebury received a similar grant.35 In 1343 William de Clopton had a grant for life of the collectorship of the port of London with wages of L20. Apparently he did not actually exercise the office because certain merchants to whom the king had farmed the customs of the realm were directed to pay him his wages.36 In 1347 he and John Herlyng—another esquire—were collectors of the petty customs in London.37 In 1352 and again in 1355 his deputy is specifically mentioned.38 In 1346 John de Herlyng was granted the office of controller of customs in Boston (Pat. Roll p. 204). In 1348 he was granted the office of controller of wools, hides and wool-fells, wines and all other merchandise at Newcastle-upon-Tyne with this added provision, “furthermore because he stays continually in the King’s company by his order, he may substitute for himself a deputy, in the said office,” etc.39 In 1352 he was controller of the customs in the port of Boston and likewise in that of Lenne—with provision in the same terms as those above for a deputy in the latter office—and collector of the petty custom in London—with deputy.40 In 1359 he surrendered the office of controller of customs at Boston for an annuity of ten marks.41 At one time he was also controller in the port of St. Botolph.42 From the fact that the records show Herlyng was constantly in the King’s court, it is clear that he exercised all these offices by deputy.
In 35 Edward III Helmyng Leget was granted the office of keeper of the smaller piece of the seal for recognizances of debts in London,43 with power to execute the office by deputy. He held this office until 1389.44 Edmund Rose held the office of keeper of the smaller piece of the seal in Norwich, with deputy.45 John de Thorp was in 1380 appointed controller of customs of wines, wools, etc. at Southampton on condition that he execute the office in person.46 Walter Whithors held the offices of keeper of the smaller piece of the seal in York, in 1348, and tronager of wool in the port of Lenne in 1352 with deputy in both offices.47 In addition to offices in the customs, places as parker of a King’s forest, or keeper of a royal castle were frequently given to the esquires. So Hugh Cheyne in 1378 had the custody of Shrewsbury Castle with wages of seven pence halfpenny therefor.48 Helmyng Leget and Thomas Cheyne at various times held the office of constable of Windsor Castle.49 John de Beverle and Robert Corby likewise had the constableship of the castle of Ledes.50 William Archebald was forester of the Forest of Braden.51 John de Beverle was parker of Eltham parks.52 Walter Whithors in 1349 was steward of the forest of Galtres. Many more examples of such grants of offices could be given.
Many of the esquires received corrodies—in most cases probably commuted for a certain yearly sum. For example, William Archebald held a eorrody at Glastonbury from 49 Edward III53 on and yet in 1378 is stated in the Patent Rolls to have been retained to stay with the King.54 So it could be shown in most cases that esquires holding corrodies did not by any means live constantly in their monasteries. William Gambon, especially, could scarcely have done so since he held corrodies at Salop, (Shrewsbury), Hayles, Haylyng, St. Oswald de Nostell, Coventre and Wenlok, at the same time.55 Other esquires who held corrodies and the names of their monasteries follow: John Beauchamp, Pershoore (Wigorn);56 John Salesbury, Stanlee;57 Simon de Bokenham, Ely;58 Helmyng Leget, Ramsey;59 Roger Clebury, Shrewsbury;60 Peter Cornwaill, Redyng;61 John Herlyng, Convent of Church of Christ, Canterbury;62 Hugh Lyngeyn, Dunstaple;63 Stephen Romylowe, Bardenay.64
Grants of wine are scarcely so common as the other kinds of grants and, so far as I have found, they are not usually given to prominent esquires. John Roos had a grant of two tuns of wine yearly;65 William Risceby of “one dolium” or two pipes of Gascon wine;66 William Strete and William Archebald each of one tun of Gascon wine yearly;67 John De Beverle and Thomas Cheyne each of two dolia of Gascon wine yearly;68 and Hugh Lyngeyn of one tun of red wine of Gascony yearly.69 One feature of the form of royal grants remains to be mentioned. Writers on Chaucer have frequently called attention to the fact that his grants contain a statement that they are made for good service done.70 This is merely a regular part of the form of a grant. Any enrollments of grants—such as those noted on the preceding page—will give examples of the use of this phrase. Further, the form of grant practically always includes a characterization of the grantee as “dilectus vallettus,” “dilectus serviens,” “dilectus armiger,” etc.
Notes
1 Cal. Pat. Roll 1380, p. 539, 1378, p. 288.
2 Richard Imworth, Thomas Stafford, Thomas Staples, Wauter de Leycester, etc., had grants of 12d. daily for life.
3 Cal. Pat. Roll 1378, p. 133.
4 idem 1386, p. 146.
5 Issues A, 169, mem. 16.
6 Devon’s Issues 1370, p. 35.
7 idem, p. 29. Issues, p. 258, mem, 14.
8 Devon’s Issues 1370, p. 372.
9 P. 216, mem. 38.
10 P. 241, mem. 11.
11 Pat. Roll 260, mem. 3.
12 idem 291, mem. 1.
13 idem 281, mem. 18.
14 issues, P. 250, mem. 2.
15 Pat. Roll 255, mem, 26.
16 Outside of these lists I have been able to find no information about these men.
17 Devon’s Issues 1370, p. 301.
18 Cal. Pat. Roll 1378, pp.189, 192.
19 See note, preceding page.
20 Issues, P. 228, mem
21 Cal. Pat. Roll 1378p. 187.
22 Issues P. 2 mem. 12. Cal. Pat. 1378, p. 157.
23 See note, preceding page.
24 Devon’s Issues, 1370, p. 156.
25 Cal. Pat. Roll 1375, p. 217.
26 Pat. Roll 295, mem. 4.
27 Pat. Roll 1399, 176.
28 Devon’s Issues 1370, p. 216.
29 Cal. Pat. Roll 1378, p150.
30 Issues, P. 237, mem. 1’7
31 idem P. 237, mem. 17.
32 Cal. Pat. Roll 1378, p. 165.
33 idem, p. 186.
34 Cal. Pat. Roll, p.11.
35 Cal. Pat. Roll 1352, p. 411.
36 C. R. 1343, p. 194.
37 Rymer, vol. 3, p. 115.
38 Cal. Pat. Roll, 1352, p. 327; C. R. 1355, p. 166.
39 Cal. Pat. Roll, p. 130.
40 Cal. Pat. Roll, 1352, pp. 327, 348, 355.
41 idem. 1378, p. 133.
42 Devon’s Issues, 1370, p. 381.
43 Cal. Pat Roll 1377-8, p. 184.
44 Cal. Pat. Roll, p. 106.
45 Idem 1384, p. 380.
46 Cal. Pat. Roll, p. 564.
47 idem, pp. 143, 293.
48 Cal. Pat. Roll, p. 248.
49 Pat. Roll 279, mem. 33.
50 idem 272, mem. 27, Exchequer K. R. Accts. 393-7.
51 Pat. Roll 290, mem. 13.
52 Cal. Pat. Roll 1378-80, p. 143.
53 C. R. 213, mem. 17.
54 Cal. Pat. Roll, p. 135.
55 C. R. 235, mem. 22 dorso.
56 C. R. 228, mem. 4 dorso.
57 idem 235, mem. 31 dorso.
58 C. R. 235, mem. 26 dorso.
59 C. R. 235, mem. 10 dorso.
60 Cal. C. R. 1356, p. 334.
61 C. R. 215, mem. 7 dorso.
62 C. R. 222, mem. 29 dorso.
63 C. R. 226, mem. 26 dorso.
64 C. R. 221, mem. 41 dorso.
65 Cal. Pat. Roll 1384, p. 446.
66 Pat. Roll 289 mem. 25.
67 Cal. Pat. Roll 1378, pp. 135, 227
68 Pat. Roll 271, mem. 21.
69 Cal. Pat. Roll 1399, p. 185.
70 Cf. Hales, Lounsbury ante.