16. DOING BUSINESS AND REGULATING TRADE IN THE CITY OF LONDON
INTRODUCTION
The City of London was an independent municipality, technically free from the intervention of the royal administration, but it nonetheless operated its own administrative, judicial, and fiscal institutions in ways that paralleled those systems throughout the realm—including Ireland and Wales. In particular, the operation of businesses in London required extensive regulation, including overseeing contracts between masters and apprentices, adjudicating disputes, and overseeing financial transactions. One very common system was known as “the assize of bread and ale.” This was designed to regulate both quality and price of two fundamental foodstuffs of medieval Britain. Regulated locally, in urban as well as in rural milieus, the assize oversaw the production and sale of bread and ale, established standard weights for loaves and vessels in which ale was sold, and regulated prices for both commodities. This was one of the most important jurisdictional activities in which local governments engaged and they took it very seriously.
The law courts in the City of London did not differ significantly from courts held at Westminster before the royal justices, or courts held in other municipalities in England, Wales, and Ireland (we do not have extant sources from Scottish cities, except for Aberdeen, which seems to have operated very similar institutions). One of the main duties of local government was regulation of the populace, either with the assistance of the Crown, in the form of the sheriff and his local officials, or independently, depending on the jurisdiction of the region. In London, the Guildhall, headed by the Lord Mayor, was the official regulatory body, and the sheriffs and other officials were appointed by it, not by the king. In areas outside the City (the square mile of London surrounded by walls and gates), royal jurisdiction prevailed. When conflicts arose between residents within and outside the city, the location of the disturbance determined the jurisdiction of the case. Most of the cases found in the records of the City of London concern financial disputes.
KEEP IN MIND AS YOU READ
Courts of law in the medieval British Isles were concerned not only with specifically criminal or disruptive behavior, but also—and on a very large scale—with regulating commercial and economic transactions. As a result, the kinds of information the reader can derive from records of courts of law provide vital information on both the ways in which such regulations were managed and also the ways in which individuals tried to bypass or overcome them. This offers the reader another dimension of understanding of the economics of the medieval world.
Document 1: The Assizes of Bread, Ale, and Foodstuffs, London, 5–6 Edward I (1277–1278)
These are the Assizes of the City of London read by the Mayor and reputable men, the second year of the Mayoralty of Gregory [de Rokesle], Robert de Arraz and Ralph le Fevere being Sheriffs and the third year of the same Mayoralty, Walter le Cornewaleys and John, son of John Adrian, Sheriffs.
First, that the peace of the lord the King be well kept between Christians.
Also that two loaves be made for 1d. and four loaves for 1d., and that none be coated with bran or made of bran [or inferior wheat or grain].
Also that no baker sell his bread before his oven, but in the market of the lord the King, and if he be found selling it in his own house he shall be in mercy to the Sheriff; nor shall any one buy such bread, under pain of losing the said bread if it be found; and that no one make bread beyond the assize.
Also every baker shall have his seal on his bread, both brown bread and white, that it may the better be known whose the bread is.
. . .
Also that no baker of white bread make tourte bread nor maker of tourte bread make white bread, for sale under the same penalty, nor any baker buy corn to sell again.
A gallon of [best] ale [is to be sold] for three farthings and [second-best ale] for one penny and no dearer.
And that no brewster henceforth sell except by true measures, viz., the gallon, the pottle, and the quart. And that they be marked with the seal of the Alderman, and that the tun be of 150 gallons and sealed by the Alderman.
. . .
Also that no retail dealer of corn, fish, poultry, or victuals shall buy victuals before the hour of Prime, nor before the reputable men of the City have bought, under penalty of forfeiting the goods bought.
Also that no cart serving the City by bringing water, wood, stones, &c., be shod with iron [i.e. use iron-clad wheels]
. . .
Also that no regratress go beyond London Bridge to buy bread and to carry it into the City, because the bakers of Southwark are not of the Justice of the City nor are [their goods] allowed to be brought back from outside the City.
. . .
And that no foreign butcher sell meat in the City except in the manner accustomed, nor cause meat to be harbored or permit it to be again carried out of the City; nor buy meat from the Jews to sell again to Christians, or meat slaughtered for Jews and by them rejected.
. . .
And that a porter of corn shall not sell nor measure corn, nor presume to enter a churchyard, house, or ship to remove corn, nor lay his hand upon corn, until he be called by those who have bought the corn.
Also that no cartman shall for the future enter the City with wood or charcoal for sale, but shall remain outside the gate at Smithfield or elsewhere as provided, except only at Cornhill, under forfeiture.
. . .
Also that no market be held on London Bridge, nor elsewhere except in places appointed.
Also that no one of the City go to Southwark to buy corn, cattle, or other merchandise there, so as to create a market there, under penalty of forfeiture of the thing bought.
. . .
Also that no one shall carry on merchandise in the City, nor make bread nor ale for sale, unless he be willing to be of the Justice of the City.
. . .
Also vendors of fish shall not throw their water into the highway, but cause it to be carried to the Thames.
Source: Calendar of Letter-Books of the City of London: A, 1275–1298. Edited by Reginald R. Sharpe. London, 1899. Pp. 215–219.
Document 2: The Assize of Bread and Ale in London, November 1, 1377
Wednesday after the Feast of All Saints [1 Nov.], 11 Edward III. [A.D. 1337], came all the brewers and brewsters of the City and suburbs before Henry Darcy, the Mayor, John de Grantham, Gregory de Nortone, John Hamond, Andrew Aubrey, Ralph de Uptone, Simon Fraunceys, Nicholas Crane [Aldermen], and others of the Commonalty, and it was forbidden them by the said Mayor and Aldermen to sell by any other measure than the gallon, the pottle, and quart, or by any measure not sealed with the seal of the Alderman of the Ward they were further forbidden to sell a gallon of the best ale for more than 1½d., a gallon of medium ale for more than 1d., and of the cheaper ale for more than ¾d., the penalty for the first conviction being imprisonment for three days and a fine of 4d.; for the second offence, imprisonment for six days and a fine of half a mark; and for the third, abjuration of the City.
Source: Calendar of Letter-Books of the City of London: F, 1337–1352. Edited by Reginald R. Sharpe. London, 1904. P. 189.
Document 3: Extracts from Pleas before the Mayor and Aldermen of London
1276
The Ward of Anketin d’Auverne within the Gate
On Wednesday the Feast of St. Vincent [22 January 1276], . . . it was agreed between Walter de la Ford, corder, and Richard Maunsel, formerly his apprentice, that the said Walter released the said Richard from his term [of service] for the sum of 17 marks, whereof 1 mark is paid in hand and the rest is to be paid by installments of 2 marks, commencing at Easter.
On Monday the octave of St. Hillary [13 Jan.], 4 Edward I [1276], John Arnold, “garlic-monger,” came [into court] and made himself indebted to Henry the Seal-maker (Sigillarius) for the sum of 40s. John is to repay Henry in two payments: 20s. at Shrove Tuesday (Carniprivium) and 20s. at Michaelmas. Because of this pledge, Henry has granted and released William Elys, his apprentice, to the aforesaid John [in exchange] for the above sum . . .
1300
Peter de Monmouth was attached to answer William Delisle’s plea that Peter render him an account for the time that the said Peter was receiver of [William’s] moneys in London. William complains that Peter was his apprentice and had in his custody goods and chattels of the said William to the value of £200, [which he held] from Easter, 27 Edward I [1299] until the following Christmas; the said Peter had refused to render account of the goods and chattels and William claims he has incurred a loss to the amount of 100 marks.
Peter came to court and argued his defense. He acknowledged freely that he was William’s apprentice and that he had certain goods and chattels of the said William in his custody, but he says he already rendered a full account to William. . . . William says that no account had been rendered, and this he is prepared to prove in any way the Court desires. And Peter says, as before, that he had rendered an account. However, when he was asked if he had any evidence of having rendered his account, he says he has not, but he says it was sufficiently known to all of his craft if he had dared put himself upon them. Being asked if he could find security for rendering an account, he says that he is unwilling to render another account. And the aforesaid William demands judgment, etc. And because the said Peter refused to render an account of what he had here acknowledged he had received, and had produced no proof that he had already rendered an account, but refused to produce the evidence demanded by the said William and to find security for his rendering a reasonable account, it is adjudged by the Mayor and Aldermen that he be committed to prison, etc.
1335
On Thursday before the Feast of Pentecost [4 June], 9 Edward III [1335], Alice de Warlee, wife of John Ingelard and widow of Philip de Graschurch, and Isabella, daughter of the said Philip, came before [the Mayor and his Court] and requested that a sum of 10½ marks, which was bequeathed to the said Isabella by her father, and is now in the custody of the said Alice, might be used to pay for Isabella’s maintenance and for teaching her a trade as an apprentice. The petition is granted.
1346
Deed whereby Margery, widow of John Deumars, binds her daughter Hawysia as an apprentice to Richard de Herpesfeld, corder, for a term of fifteen years from Easter, 20 Edward III [1346].
Agreed by Richard Lacer, Mayor, and Edmund de Hemenhale and John de Gloucestre, Sheriffs. Witnesses: John de la Rokele, Bartholomew Deumars, Thomas de Ispania, John Brutyn, Richard de Wycoumbe, and others [not named]. Dated Easter Sunday [16 April], the above year.
Acknowledged before Thomas de Maryns, the Chamberlain, on Saturday before the Feast of St. Margaret [20 July].
1351
Deed of covenant is entered into, between Thomas Levelyf, executor of John de Totenhale, late fripperer and John Robynet, fripperer, concerning the placing of John, son of the aforesaid John de Totenhale, as an apprentice with the said John Robynet for a term of twelve years.
Agreed to by Richard de Kyslyngbury, Mayor; John Nott and William de Wyrcestre, Sheriffs. Witnesses: Ralph de Cauntebregge, Richard de Claverynge, Hugh de la March, and others [not named]. Dated 12 July, 25 Edward III [1351].
Sureties for the payment of a sum of £8 12s. 9d. to the apprentice at the end of his term are Walter le Forester and Richard de Claverynge, skinners, and William Laurence, fishmonger.
Deed of covenant is entered into between the above Thomas Levelyf and Hugh de la Marche, fripperer, concerning the placing of John, the younger son of the above John de Totenhale, as apprentice with the said Hugh for a like term. Witnesses: Ralph de Cauntebrugge, Richard de Claverynge, William Credil, and others [not named]. Dated 15 July, 25 Edward III. [1351].
Sureties for similar payment as above are William Lawrence, fishmonger, and Thomas atte Noket, draper.
Sources: Calendar of Letter-Books of the City of London: A, 1275–1298. Edited by Reginald R. Sharpe. London, 1899. Pp. 226–227; Calendar of Letter-Books of the City of London: C, 1291–1309. Edited by Reginald R. Sharpe. London, 1901. Pp. 184–185; Calendar of Letter-Books of the City of London: E, 1314–1337. Edited by Reginald R. Sharpe. London, 1903. P. 200; Calendar of Letter-Books of the City of London: F, 1337–1352. Edited by Reginald R. Sharpe. London, 1904. Pp. 142, 234.
AFTERMATH
The city of London was one of the most vibrant urban centers in medieval Europe and one reason for its success was the effectiveness of the Guildhall as administrator of the city. Even so, the city experienced high levels of disorder and stress, which was expressed as time went on by conflict between masters and apprentices during the Great Rising of 1381 (also known inaccurately as the English Peasants’ Revolt) as well as altercations between the city and its adjoining municipalities of Westminster and Southwark. London was also vulnerable as a financial and commercial center during times of war, especially when King Edward I went to war with France in the 1290s and during the Hundred Years’ War (1330–1453) because of restraints on trade and the deporting of foreign merchants from the city. Nevertheless, the kinds of interactions taking place in the sources were the daily business of the mayor’s administration and his court, and they only expanded in number and complexity as time went on. London remained the model for other British cities—including Dublin in Ireland and Edinburgh in Scotland—in managing their economic systems and institutions.
ASK YOURSELF
Why would it be so important to regulate the production of bread and ale?
Why would standardizing of weights and measures be considered essential in maintaining effective governance of the medieval economy?
What kinds of relationships between masters and apprentices are demonstrated in these sources? What conflicts could arise between them? How could families protect their children who had been taken on as apprentices?
TOPICS TO CONSIDER
Consider the fact that the usual wage for an unskilled laborer was about a penny a day—in the fourteenth century, that rose to two to three pennies a day—but that the transactions demonstrated in these sources suggest that far larger sums were being exchanged by individuals. What does this say about the value of apprenticeship to young people?
Consider the kinds of jobs mentioned in these sources. Many of them are gender-specific; for instance, the term “brewster” was used only for women who brewed ale and “regrators” or “regratesses” were also female-only jobs. This suggests that gender significantly affected the kinds of jobs open to different people as well as their earning potential.
Further Information
Bennett, Judith. Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in Medieval England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300–1600. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Davis, James. “Baking for the Common Good: A Reassessment of the Assize of Bread in Medieval England.” The Economic History Review 57, no. 3 (2004): 465–502.
Thrupp, Sylvia. The Merchant Class of Medieval London, 1300–1500. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1948.