Chapter XXV The “Taxatio” of Pope Nicholas IV
In the thirteenth century the popes assumed the right, as feudal lords over the Church, to demand from every church benefice a fine of its first year’s income from every new incumbent, and an annual tax of one-tenth of its income. The Saxon kings had made the Church lands exempt from state imposts;416 but now kings very naturally began to think that the necessities of the State had as good a claim as those of the pope; and there ensued a certain amount of friction. The popes, with very astute policy, reconciled the kings to the tax by sometimes ceding the proceeds of it to them. Thus in 1253, Pope Innocent IV. gave the tenths to King Henry III. for three years, which occasioned a taxation or valuation to be made in the following year, sometimes called the Norwich Taxation, sometimes Pope Innocent’s Valor.
Again, in 1288, Pope Nicholas IV. gave the tenths to King Edward I. for six years, towards an expedition to the Holy Land; that they might be fully collected a new taxation was made by the king’s precept, which was begun in that year and finished in the province of Canterbury in 1291, and in the province of York in 1292.417 This taxation continued to be the basis of all assessments upon the Church down to the time of the Reformation.
The survey takes each diocese by itself, each archdeaconry of the diocese, each rural deanery, and, finally, each benefice. Here is a specimen, selected because it is a deanery of which the writer has some personal knowledge.
Spiritualia Archidiaconatus Essexiæ. Decanatus de Berdestaple.
| £ | s. | d. | ||||
| Ecclīā de Thurrok pva | 5 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Porc̄ō Rectoris de Westurrok ibidem | 0 | 6 | 6 | |||
| Ecclīā de Oresith | 16 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Porcio Cancellarii Sc̄ī Pauli Lond’ ibidem | 6 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Porcio Magr̄ī Johis de Sc̄ō Claro ibidem | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Porcio Prioris de Pritelwell in North Beniflete | 1 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Porcio Abbīs̄ Westm. ibidem | 0 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Porcio Decani Sc̄ī Martini London’ ibm̄ | 0 | 10 | 0 | |||
| Ecclīā de Westillebȳ | 13 | 16 | 8 | |||
| Ecclīā de Estillebȳ | 14 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Ecclīā de Hornyngdone | 12 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Vicar’ ejusdem | 4 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Porcio Abbīs̄ Colcestr’ ibidem | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Porcio Prioris de Beremondes’ ibidem | 1 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Ecclīā de Mockyng | 14 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Porcio Abbisse de Berkyngg ibidem | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Ecclīā de Stanford | 16 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Pensio Abbīs̄ de Bileye in Langedon | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Ecclīā de Bulephen | 13 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Ecclīā de Coringham | 8 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Porcio Prioris de P’telewell in Wikford | 2 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Porcio ejusdem Prioris in Thunderle | 1 | 4 | 0 | |||
| Ecclīā de Bures | 6 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Ecclīā de Bourgsted | 13 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Ecclīā de Leyndon | 13 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Ecclīā de Fobbing | 10 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Ecclesia de Chaldewell | 5 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Ecclīā de Magna Bemfleth | 6 | 13 | 0 | |||
| Porcio Abbatis Colcestr’ in Ecclīā de Picher’ cu’ penc’ sua in eadem | 1 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Ecclīā Dontone | 5 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Pensio Prioris de Okebourn ibidem | 2 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Ecclīā de Burgsted pva | 4 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Ecclīā de Hoton | 9 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Penc’ Abbīs̄ de Bello ibidem | 0 | 5 | 0 | |||
| Ecclīā de Shenefeud | 10 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Ecclīā de Duddynggeherst | 8 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Ecclīā de Gingg Rad’i | 6 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Ecclīā de Ramesden Cray | 5 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Ecclīā de Ramesden Belhous | 6 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Ecclīā de Dounham | 5 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Ecclīā de Fangge | 6 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Sm̄a £268 14s. 10d. | ||||||
| In the list of smaller benefices we find also belonging to this deanery— | ||||||
| Vicar’ de Tilleby magna | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Ecclīā de Parva Benifleth | 1 | 13 | 4 | |||
| Ecclīā de Wykford | 2 | 6 | 8 | |||
| Ecclīā de Thunderle | 1 | 10 | 0 | |||
| Ecclīā de Thorndon magna | 1 | 13 | 4 | |||
From the list of temporalia in the same deanery we find that the following—the Abbots of Coggeshall, Stratford, St. Osyth, Colchester, Battle, Westminster, Byleigh, the Abbess of Barking, the Priors of Thoby, Prittlewell, Okeburn, Bermondsey, Leigh, Buttele,418 Kereseye, the Chapter of St. Paul’s, and the Chapter of St. Martin’s, London, had income in land, rent, marsh, young of animals, mills, fallen wood, from the following places: Langedon, Thorndon magna, Bursted parva, Ging Rudulphi, Thorndon, Thorndon parva, Tillebery parva, Duddyngeherst, Stornyngdon, Donton, Doneham, Westlee, Horton, Wykford, Bournstead (Bursted) magna, Bulewephen, Fanga (Vange), Leydon, Mocrkyngge, Bowers, Benifleth parva, Chaldwell, Shenefeud, Piches [in a footnote Picheseye = Pitsey], Raumesden Cray, Rammesden Belhous, Felbingge, Thurrock parva, Thonderle, Bemfleth magna.
Every “Ecclesia” in the list gives the name of a parish, and where the word occurs it implies that the parish was a rectory. Where it is followed by Vicaria ejusdem—the vicarage of the same—it implies that the rectory had been appropriated to some religious house, which had founded a vicarage therein; in this particular deanery there is only one vicarage; but it is very possible, for anything which appears, that some of the Ecclesiæ may have been appropriated to a religious house, which was technically the rector possessing all spiritual and temporal rights in the church and parish, and serving the cure by one of its own members, or by a stipendiary priest.
Even where the benefice had not been appropriated to a religious house, it often happened that some “portion” of the profits of the benefice—e.g. of the tithe or of some part of the land—had been appropriated; or that a definite annual payment, “pension,” had been assigned out of the benefice. Thus, under “Ecclesia de Oresith,” the rectory of Orsett, appears quite a list of “portions,” viz. of the Chancellor of St. Paul’s, of Mr. John of St. Clair, of the Prior of Prittlewell, of the Abbot of Westminster, of the Dean of St. Martin, London; the Abbot of Bileigh had a “pension” out of the rectory of Stanford, the Prior of Oakburn out of Dunton, the Abbot of Battle out of Hutton. There are two ways of explaining this. One is the way of the enemy of the religious houses, whose cynical explanation is that the monks had their spoon in everybody’s porridge—the Rector of Orsett had half a dozen spoons clattering together in his dish. The other explanation is that of the friend of the religious houses: that they were held in such general admiration, that lords of manors and patrons of parochial benefices who could not do more, at least made small appropriations to them out of their patronage, in token of good will, and in order to secure a permanent interest in the friendship and prayers of the Religious. With these explanations of the list of benefices of the deanery of Barstaple, we leave it for the present, proposing to make it the text of further exposition hereafter.419
In studying this mediæval clergy-list, the first thought which occurs to every one is to count the parishes and ascertain the total. Allowing for difficulties which tend to a few omissions, or the counting of a few names over again, it may be depended upon that the number of parishes was about 8085; that out of those which had been appropriated to religious bodies vicarages had been endowed in about 1487, the 457 chapels had probably some endowment, besides the chapels-of-ease, dependent on the incumbent of the parish. Adding the parish churches and chapels together, we get a total of 8542 endowed places of public worship and centres of pastoral care.420
| Ecclesiæ. | Vicarages founded in them. | Chapels. | Ecclesiæ not exceeding 10 marks. | Vicarages ditto. | ||||||
| Canterbury | 221 | 58 | 15 | 47 | 28 | |||||
| Rochester | 108 | 31 | 0 | 50 | 39 | |||||
| London | 459 | 86 | 13 | 150 | 33 | |||||
| Lincoln | 1738 | 353 | 76 | 467 | 279 | |||||
| Norwich | 1165 | 80 | 17 | 354 | 35 | |||||
| Chichester | 286 | 112 | 3 | 91 | 81 | |||||
| Exeter | 529 | 139 | 49 | 344 | 158 | |||||
| Hereford | 291 | 94 | 48 | 155 | 82 | |||||
| Sarum | 493 | 104 | 50 | 222 | 80 | |||||
| Bath and Wells | 262 | 42 | 19 | 113 | 29 | |||||
| Winton | 338 | 53 | 41 | 84 | 34 | |||||
| Worcester | 335 | 34 | 60 | 136 | 26 | |||||
| Coventry and Lichfield | 382 | 28 | 27 | 154 | 27 | |||||
| Ely | 135 | 37 | 3 | 15 | 35 | |||||
| St. David’s | 223 | 0 | 4 | 124 | 0 | |||||
| Llandaff | 131 | 9 | 9 | 72 | 6 | |||||
| St. Asaph’s | 109 | 63 | 13 | 47 | 55 | |||||
| Bangor | 34 | 0 | 1 | 26 | 1 | |||||
| York | 625 | 113 | 4 | 93 | 61 | |||||
| Durham | 117 | 43 | 4 | 15 | 25 | |||||
| Carlisle | 94 | 25 | 1 | 2 | 14 | |||||
| 8085 | 1487 | 457 | 2711 | 1125 | ||||||
| 457 | 1125 | |||||||||
| 8542 | 3836 | |||||||||
The next question which naturally excites interest is the incomes of the benefices, by which the services of the mediæval parish clergy were remunerated. The general idea is that the mediæval clergy were richly endowed. The truth which is revealed by the figures of this official document is that, when we take away the livings assigned by their patrons as the prebends of cathedrals, and those appropriated to religious houses, the benefices of the “working clergy,” the rectors and vicars, were mostly of small value.
Before we go into a detailed examination of them, it is desirable to make two preliminary remarks. The first is as to the value of money at that period. The question will be more fully considered in the next chapter in connection with the new valuation which was made in the time of Henry VIII., but it will be convenient to anticipate here the estimate there accepted that the purchasing power of money at the end of the thirteenth century was about twenty-four times as great as now, so that a pound was then equivalent to about £24 now. The other remark is in reply to the question which will naturally arise in every reader’s mind: were not the benefices much undervalued? On the contrary, it was the object of pope and king to estimate them as highly as possible, so as to increase the amount of the tenth to be demanded from them. Every source of income was taken into the account; and the general complaint at the time was that they were overestimated.
Turning now to a little study of the value of the ordinary parochial benefices, the writer has shrunk from the laborious task of anything like a complete analysis; for a few general facts are sufficient for the present purpose. First of all, many of the benefices were so small that both pope and king421 were ashamed to demand a tenth of their poor income; a limit of ten marks (= £6 13s. 4d.) was fixed, and all livings not over that sum were exempted. No wonder, when we reckon that the present value of a benefice of ten marks would be about £160 a year. But there were 2711 rectories and 1129 vicarages, making a total of 3840, nearly half the number of parochial benefices under the limit of ten marks.
Looking at the better-endowed benefices: Canterbury was an exceptionally rich diocese; out of its 279 benefices, there are 82 of ten marks and under, only 80 above £20, and the richest living, a rare exception, is £133. In Rochester, with 139 benefices, 46 are less than ten marks, only 34 of £20 and upwards, and there are two “golden livings” of £60 each. In Exeter diocese, out of 668 benefices, there are 189 of ten marks and under, 15 of £20 and over, only one so large as £50. In Bath and Wells, out of 304 parishes, there are 124 under ten marks; three of £50 and over, and the highest is one of £60. In Carlisle, out of 24 parishes, there are 18 of ten marks and under; 42 of £20 and over; one of £90, and one of £120. The usual income of a vicarage was £5, a little more or less; there are very few of greater value, up to £8 and £10.
The conclusion is forced upon us by these official figures, that the mediæval parish clergy were scantily endowed; one would wonder how, in many cases, with such endowments, they could live, and maintain hospitality to travellers, and help their poor, if one did not call to mind that the majority of the clergy had not a wife and family to maintain; that the rectors were mostly of the families of the gentry, and many of the vicars probably of the middle class, and that—then, as now—the majority of the beneficed clergy probably had some resources of their own, and perhaps—then, as now—brought as much into the church of their own as they took out of it in their annual profits.
A contemporary copy of the taxation of the Diocese of Exeter gives on the end page a summary of the tenths for the whole kingdom—
| £ | s. | d. | ||||
| Sum of the tenth of the Province of Canterbury | 16,258 | 18 | 4 | |||
| Sum of the tenth of the Province of York | 4,155 | 10 | 7 | |||
| Sum total of both provinces | 20,414 | 8 | 11 | |||
| Which, multiplied by ten, will give the total value taxed | 204,144 | 9 | 2 |
The Bishop of Oxford, “as the result of a painful calculation from the ‘Taxatio,’” arrives at the following conclusion:—
Spirituals, £135,665; temporals, £74,978; total, £210,644; and the temporals of the bishops included in the total amount of temporals was £16,826.
Of the number of the clergy nearly a century later we have an exact official return. In the year 1377 a poll-tax was levied on the whole body of the clergy of England and Wales, excepting those of the counties Palatine of Durham and Chester, of twelve-pence on “every beneficed ecclesiastic, exempt and not exempt, privileged and not privileged, and all abbots, priors, abbesses, prioresses, monks, canons, canonesses, and other regulars of whatever order, sex, and condition, the four orders of mendicants alone excepted;” and fourpence on “every priest, deacon, sub-deacon, accolite, and those obtaining the first tonsure exceeding the age of fourteen years.”
The total number of men given in the returns is 15,238 beneficed, and 13,943 unbeneficed. If we suppose the number in the excepted counties of Durham and Chester to have been in the same proportion, we should have a total for the whole of England (Wales is not included in the return) of about 15,800 beneficed, and 14,000 unbeneficed, and a total of about 29,800. From the same return we gather that the whole population of the country at that time was about 2,065,000.422