galloway,murphy.91.feeding london.pdf

Editorial Committee

EditorPATRICIA CROOT

Victoria County History of Middlesex,Institute of Historical Research

J. L. BOLTON

Senior Lecturer in History,Queen Mary & Westfield College

PETER EARLE

Reader in Econonlic HistoryLondon School of Economics

DAVID R. GREEN

Lecturer in Geography,King's College London

VANESSA A. HARDINGLecturer in London History,

Birkbeck College

NEGLEY HARTE

Senior Lecturer in Economic History,University College London

DEREK KEENE,Director,

Centre for Metropolitan History,Institute of Historical Research

M. H. PORT

Professor of Modern History,Queen Mary & Westfield College

ISOBEL WATSON

Director,Roland House Research,

Stepney

Review EditorPAUL JOHNSON

Lecturer in Social History,London School of Economics

Editorial AdvisersT. C. BARKER, Professor of Econonlic History, London School of Economics; CAROLINE BARRON, Senior Lecturer inHistory, Royal Holloway and Bedford New College; FRANCOIS BEDARIDA, Fondation Nationale des SciencesPolitiques, Paris; c. N. L. BROOKE, Dixie Professor of Ecclesiastical History, University of Cambridge; PENELOPE J.

CORFIELD, Reader in History, Royal Holloway and Bedford New College; CELINA FOX, Curator of Paintings, TheMuseum of London; PETER HALL, Professor of Geography, University of Reading; MAX HEBDITCH, Director, TheMuseum of London; RALPH HYDE, Keeper of Prints & Maps, Guildhall Library; D. 1. OLSEN, Professor of History,Vassar College; M. 1. POWER, Lecturer in History, University of Liverpool; F. H. W. SHEPPARD, formerly GeneralEditor, Survey of London; SIR JOHN SUMMERSON, formerly Curator, Sir John Soane's Museum; F. M. L. THOMPSON,formerly Director, Institute of Historical Research.

Published by the LONDON JOURNAL TRUST, Registered Charity No. 279299c/o Department of History, Queen Mary & Westfield College, London El.

Trustees: Dr Derek Keene, Professor M. H. Port, Dr F. H. W. Sheppard, Professor F. M. L. Thompson,Professor Ken Young.

The London JournalVolume 16, No.1, 1991

CONTENTS

ARTICLESJAMES A. GALLOWAY

and MARGARET MURPHYJEREMY BOULTON

CRAIG ROSE

Feeding the City: Medieval London and its AgrarianHinterland

Itching After Private Marryings? Marriage Customs inSeventeenth-Century London

Evangelical Philanthropy and Anglican Revival: theCharity Schools of Augustan London, 1698-1740

3

15

35

EXHIBITION REVIEWP.1. MARSHALL The Nehru Gallery of Indian Art 1550-1900

CONFERENCE REPORTHEATHER CREATON Metropolitan Folklore

REVIEW ARTICLEDAVID R. GREEN World Systems and London's History

66

69

71

BOOK REVIEWSPENELOPE 1. CORFIELD and DEREK KEENE, editors, Work in Towns 850-1850 L. D. Schwarz 74RICHARD HOLT and GERVASE ROSSER, editors, The Medieval Town: a reader in English urbanhistory 1200-1540 Vanessa Harding 75

JONATHAN BARRY, editor, The Tudor and Stuart Town: a reader in English urban history1530-1688 Tim Meldrum 76

PETER BORSAY, editor, The Eighteenth-century Town: a reader in English urban history1688-1830 Chris Evans 78

GAVIN WEIGHTMAN, London River: the Thames Story Geraint Ellis 80SUSAN BRIGDEN, London and the Reformation Peter Lake 82SEAN SHESGREEN, editor, The Criers and Hawkers of London: Engravings and Drawings byMarcellus Laroon Vanessa Harding 84

P.1. ATKINS, The Directories of London 1677-1977 Heather Creaton 85JAMES TIERNEY, editor, The Correspondence of Robert Dodsley 1733-1764 Keith Maslen 86JAMES STEPHEN TAYLOR, Poverty, Migration and Settlement in the Industrial Revolution:Sojourners' Narratives Michael E. Rose 87

SHIRLEY PORTER, A Minister for London: a Capital Concept John Ramsden 89ANDREW DAVIES, The East End Nobody Knows: a history, a guide, an exploration

Elaine R. Smith 91DAVID PAM, A Parish near London: A History of Enfield. Vol. I, Before 1837 Diana Rau 92

SHORTER REVIEWSRICHARD RODGER, editor, The Urban History Yearbook 1989 David R. Green 94H. S. COBB, editor, The Overseas Trade of London: Exchequer Customs Accounts 1480-1

A. R. Bridbury 94CHARLES A. RIVINGTON, 'Tyrant': The Story of John Barber, 1675 to 1741, Jacobite LordMayor of London and Printer and Friend to Dr Swift John Sainsbury 95

GUY WILLIAMS, Augustus Pugin versus Decimus Burton. A Victorian Architectural DuelM. H. Port 95

B. EVANS, Bygone Jlford J. L. Bolton 96MICHAEL BONA VIA, London Before J Forget Linda Sampson 96

Notes on Contributors

James A. Galloway and Margaret Murphy are Researchers in the Centre for Metropolitan History, Institute ofHistorical Research.Jeremy Boulton was Research Associate at the Cambridge Population Group until September 1990, and is nowLecturer in Social History at the University of Newcastle.Craig Rose is the Adrian Research Fellow at Darwin College Cambridge, currently working on a study of thereign of William III.P. J. Marshal is Rhodes Professor of Imperial History at King's College London.Heather Creaton is Deputy Director at the Centre for Metropolitan History.David R. Green is Lecturer in Geography at King's College London.

Patrons

The Midland Bank pIcThe National Westminster Bank pIc

The Survey of LondonThe Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths

Institutions and companies are invited to take out a Patron Subscription (£100 p.a., entitling subscribers to fivecopies per issue.)

Feeding the City:Medieval London and itsAgrarian Hinterlandl

JAMES A. GALLOWAY and MARGARET MURPHY

Inherent specialization becomes actual only when there is at hand some market to act, in thewords of Burleigh, as 'an encouragement to the husbandman to apply and follow their tillagewith confort of gayn'. And it was becoming more and more the lot of the capital to supply thatencouragement and thereby to promote, in some degree, agricultural specialization and themost profitable use of the soil. 2

The opening quotation is taken from Jack Fisher's now classic study of the London foodmarket in the early modern period. Although over 50 years old, it remains a uniquelycoherent exploration of the effect of London's demand on its agricultural hinterland and the

development of networks of supply to the capital. In this and other writings Fisher examined thedichotomy of views expressed by Tudor and Stuart commentators in their evaluations of theeconomic impact of the capital. To some the city was a rapacious monster - a gigantic sumpdevouring the nation's trade and produce - while to others it was the centre of all progress, whosebeneficial influence radiated out into the surrounding shires. The stimulus which urban marketscould have on the development of husbandry was observed by many, although they differed in theirassessment of the long-term effect of this stimulus. Fisher likewise recognised the negative implica-tions of London's great appetite and the fact that the high profits of landlords and farmers werefrequently obtained by 'pinching the bellies of the local poor'. However, he concluded that thedemands of early modern London gave a powerful impetus to the commercialisation of agriculturein England.3The relevance of these views of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century London to the medieval city

might seem slender. The idea that medieval agriculture was capable of responding to a stimuluswhich might outweigh environmental factors is a new and in some areas a controversial one, as is thenotion that c. 1300 there existed in England a metropolis capable of providing such a stimulus.However, recent work on the state of London at that time would indicate that the traditionalestimates of London's pre-Black Death population of 40-50,000 must be revised upwards, perhapsto as much as 80-100,000.4 It is likely therefore that London's population in 1300 was at about thesame level as it was at the beginning of Jack Fisher's period.5 While he believed that London'spopulation was at quite a low level throughout the medieval period, Fisher did predict that if asimilar study of the Middle Ages was undertaken it would reveal 'in embryo' the sort of specialisedproduction for the market which he found for the later period.6This prediction seems even more plausible in the light of higher population figures. A city of 80-

100,000 people would have constituted an enormous centre of demand in a pre-industrial society,not just for foodstuffs but for fuel, fodder, building materials and raw materials for industry. Theprecise level of this demand is difficult to calculate. One can work out a yearly per capita foodrequirement from modern nutritional estimates of basic calorific needs and a similar calculation canbe made with regard to fuel. On this basis the London of c. 1300probably consumed in excess of onemillion bushels of various grains and burnt up to one hundred thousand tons of wood each year. 7Calculations like this, while useful, should not be pushed too far. Some people frequently livedbelow subsistence level, while others were wealthy enough to feed vast amounts of oats and peas totheir riding-horses and buy quantities of fish to feed the pike in their fishponds.8 The poorer sectionsof the population would get their full calorific requirement from a very small range of foodstuffs,while richer citizens enjoyed a much wider (though not necessarily healthier) variety of products.The level of demand would also have been affected periodically by the presence in London of Court

Marcos García

Marcos García

Marcos García

4 JAMES A. GALLOWAY AND MARGARET MURPHY

and Parliament while the large religious houses like Westminster abbey, although supplied to someextent from their own lands, were no strangers to the London market both as consumers and assellers of products surplus to their needs.9Whatever their individual requirements, the citizens of London had to be fed and there is no

doubt but that the capital's appetite must have placed considerable demands on an agriculturalhinterland in which overall levels of land and labour productivity remained low. The spatial con-centration of this demand would have been even more influential than its absolute level. Thegreatest of the provincial towns did not approach one half and perhaps not even a quarter ofLondon's population, and the chief urban centres closest to the capital are unlikely to have hadpopulations in excess of 10,000 persons each.lOIt was in order to investigate the regional impact of London's demand for foodstuffs and fuel in

the period before the Black Death that the Feeding the City project was set up in 1988 at the Centrefor Metropolitan History. The two strands of research which are drawn together by the projectreflect the interests and work of the project's two directors. Derek Keene's upward revision of theestimated population of London and his identification of the period c. 1300 as the city's medievalpeak provoked considerable interest among economic and agrarian historians. Bruce Campbell,whose work has placed him among those who see the medieval agrarian economy as capable ofinnovation and responsive to market forces, recognised both that a study of London's provisioningregion might answer important questions relating to the medieval economy as a whole, and that theperiod c. 1300 is a particularly good one for the survival of relevant source material.ll Together theyformulated a research proposal which was accepted by the Leverhulme Trust who agreed to fundthe work for three years.Defining the region from which London drew its supplies of necessities and which in turn may

have been stimulated to specialise or intensify agricultural production is not an easy exercise. Toidentify the whole extent of such a region - which almost certainly included the whole of Englandand extended into other countries - would bean enormous task. Therefore it was decided to look atan area sufficiently compact to enable detailed work to be carried out, yet large enough to containareas with contrasting soils, topography, differential access to marketing and transport networks,and distinctive agrarian regimes. The area selected for study comprises the ten counties shown inFigure 1.The project draws on the rich documentary sources which survive for English demesne agriculture

in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth_centuries. It is assembling a computerised database drawnfrom 450-500 demesne account rolls pertaining to some 200 different manors throughout the studyarea. These accounts, which relate to land directly managed by lords, contain a wealth of informa-tion on the practice of agriculture in a form more systematic and detailed than any other pre-nineteenth-century records. When their information on crops, livestock, prices, and agriculturalpractices is analysed chronologically and spatially it should permit the identification of specialisedzones of agricultural production and differential involvement in the market economy. In addition,the extents - summary descriptions of manors - contained in some 2,000 inquisitions post mortem(hereafter IPMs) are being used to study variations in the occurrence and valuation of resources,principally arable land, meadow, pasture and wood.12Computer analysis of these sources augmented by computer mapping will enable a regional

picture to be built up and areas of specialised agrarian regimes to be identified. For analysing theabundant IPM data the study area is divided into 274 10-by-10-kilometre grid squares, and averageland values, acreages, etc., can be calculated for each square. The survival of account rolls is moregeographically patchy, but emphasis is given to the systematic collection of quantitative data whichwill allow direct comparison between places, manors and estates. In this way a broader view of theagricultural geography of medieval England will be obtained, contrasting with the more particularstudies of individual manors and estates which have dominated the literature heretofore.One of the primary aims of the project is to test the relevance to the medieval economy of that

body of geographical theory which holds that demand from major cities tends to promote specialisa-tion in the agricultural production of the surrounding countryside and that this specialisation has a

FEEDING THE CITY: MEDIEVAL LONDON AND ITS AGRARIAN HINTERLAND 5

30

25

20

15

10

55

Figure 1. 'Feeding the City' Project Study Area

oI

60

20I

Km

40I

65

20

15

. 10

spatial aspect.13 Areas with ready and inexpensive access to a city will, it is held, tend to developagrarian regimes different to those at a further remove. In general, products which require substan-tiallabour inputs or which are perishable or expensive to transport, will be characteristic of areasclose to the city, while less labour-intensive and more readily transportable products will dominateagriculture in the more distant parts of the city's region. As a result urban hinterlands will tend todevelop zones or regions of specialised production, as producers adopt the forms of land use whichare most profitable in any given location. In this way major cities assume a key role in moulding thedevelopment of regional and national economies, and promoting the growth of trade in specialisedagrarian products; demand for supplies can thus be seen as a prime determinant of the shape of anyregion with a metropolis at its heart.Although the main computer analysis of the project is yet to take place, certain significant

features of the metropolitan hinterland are already emerging, and the remainder of this paper isdevoted to a consideration of these, ~nd of their implications for future research. Firstly we considerthe London region as a whole in terms of its degree of commercialisation and the ways in whichproducers interacted with the market. Secondly, a range of specific agricultural products is discussedand evidence for their specialised production for the market presented.


I

The view that the Middle Ages were basically non-commercialised, dominated by a 'naturaleconomy' to which markets and money were alien, has long been discarded. It is now recognisedthat by the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (if not earlier) all sections of society were influenced to agreater or lesser extent by the requirement for cash, and were increasingly intent on adaptingtraditional forms of organisation so that they would yield a cash income.14 The movement to thedirect management of manorial demesnes in the thirteenth century, and the associated directinterest of lords in the marketing of agricultural products, was in part a response to this changingeconomic climate, although its chronology and geography were complex. ISThe London region was certainly one of the most commercialised areas of England, with every

conceivable type of agricultural product finding its way onto the market. Producers from all levels ofsociety were involved with the market, although the scale of their involvement, and the extent towhich this was recorded, varied considerably. While the peasantry might supplement their sub-sistence economy by the regular sale of small quantities of grains, vegetables, or livestock and theirproducts, the lords of great estates could generate enormous cash incomes through skilful adap-tation to the needs of the market, catering to the needs of urban populations and royal oraristocratic households.16 Just as the amounts of agricultural produce marketed varied, so did themethods used to put produce on the market. Three principal types of sale are encountered inLondon's hinterland: sales to merchants at the point of production, sales in local markets, and directselling in the metropolis.Sales to merchants appear to be particularly characteristic of certain estates, such as Christ-

church Canterbury and Peterborough abbey, and cover a wide variety of commodities includinggrain, livestock, wool, timber and hay. Sometimes the account rolls refer specifically to merchants,for example the London merchants who were entertained on the Christchurch Canterbury manor ofMerstham in Surrey in 1301.17 Another indication of the involvement of merchants is theappearance of references to merchants' advantagium in an account. This advantage took the form ofan extra quantity of grain or head of livestock thrown in gratis with a large sale. Thus, the 1303-4account for the manor of Farningham in Kent, also belonging to Christchurch, records the receipt of£5 14s 6d for sale of 29 quarters 5 bushels of wheat at 4s a quarter explaining the cash shortfall by thefact that 1 quarter of wheat 'datum fuit modo mercator'. Similarly, in 1309-10 the Peterboroughabbey manor of Eye in Northamptonshire gave merchants advantagium of 1 ewe on a sale of 190ewes, and 10 lamb pelts on a sale of 176 adult and 79 lamb pelts.18 Such regular arrangements withmerchants would relieve a manor of the problem of finding a market and the transport costs ofbringing produce to it, as the purchaser would either come to the manor or arrange some suitablecollection point. Other manors dealing directly with merchants include East Farleigh and Maidstonein Kent and Great Bardfield, Sutton, and Grays Thurrock in Essex.19 These contacts with merchantsmay have given manorial administrators valuable information as to which products were most indemand, and perhaps also provided opportunities for the transmission of ideas on agriculturaltechnique and technological innovation.By the end of the thirteenth century a dense network of local markets existed in England,

providing outlets for commodities of all types.20 While account rolls rarely specify places of sale, it isreasonable to assume that a large proportion of demesne products entered into commerce via theselocal outlets. In some cases the market will be named in the documents, and we can see what mustotherwise be inferred.The town of Henley in Oxfordshire had a particular importance in the supply of grain to the

capital. Located at what was, by the later thirteenth century, the effective head of navigation on theriver Thames, Henley acted as an entrepot where grain was brought and stored prior to shipping toLondon.21 The wills of early fourteenth century Londoners show direct involvement in the Henleytrade; merchants and cornmongers from the capital held granaries and houses in Henley, andsometimes the same men had quayside interests in London. Adam Wade, a London merchant whodied in 1310, had interests in Queenhithe in London together with two granaries in Henley and astone house at the head of the bridge there. 22 The reeves of the Merton College manor of Cuxham


were frequent visitors to Henley selling grain; in the accounting year 1298-9 the reeve spent a totalof 32 days there and in 1299 the manor of Holywell just outside the walls of Oxford, sent grain incarts to be sold in Henley.23 Another Merton College manor, Ibstone in Buckinghamshire, on atleast two occasions in the 1290s hired granaries in Henley in which to store grain.24Henley's sphereof influence was considerable, its markets also being used by the Westminster abbey manor ofLaunton in north-east Oxfordshire and the Oseney abbey manor of Kidlington to the north ofOxford, both some 40 kilometres distant.25Other market towns undoubtedly performed similar functions as staging posts between producer

and metropolitan market, though few shared Henley's locational advantages. Ware, at the effectivehead of navigation on the Lea, and Faversham in Kent may have been two such, while HighWycombe (Bucks.) seems to have acted as a collection point for Chiltern wheat and barley formalting, prior to transport to London.26 Much of this grain may have travelled by road, and it isinteresting to note that in the mid fourteenth century a London corn dealer bequeathed money forthe upkeep of the highway between Newgate and Wycombe.27The third form of sale, direct marketing of produce in London, would have been adopted by

manors unwilling or unable to use local markets. These direct links are less common, or at least arenot commonly documented, but are nonetheless striking. Thus in 1304 the Ramsey abbey manor ofShillington in Bedfordshire used the carrying services of customary tenants to transport 48 quartersof wheat to London to be sold.28Cranfield, another Ramsey manor also sold grain in London at thisperiod.29 The suspicion that this may be a feature peculiar to the Ramsey estate is partly dispelled bythe fact that the lay Bedforshire manor of Higham Gobion sent regular cartloads of wheat and maltto be sold in London, albeit at a slightly later period.30 The common elements in these cases arelocation and the continued enforcement of labour services, which, although not costless, may havebeen considered more economic than commercial carriage for an overland journey of some 60kilometres. To carry a quarter of wheat 40 miles (64.5 kilometres) in Essex and Hertfordshire cost14d in 1296-7, at a time when the sale price of wheat in local markets was 58d a quarter.31It may also be that such direct links with the metropolis point to local gaps or weaknesses in the

network of urban supply routes, which elsewhere would channel produce towards the centres ofconsumption. Regular long-distance supply networks based on local market towns were most suitedto products for which there was a constant demand and which were readily transportable, pre-eminently grain. Other types of products, due to their perishable character, had to be producedmuch closer to the point of consumption; amongst the most important of these were fruit andvegetables.

II

Jack Fisher paid particular attention to the development of intensive market gardening close to theearly modern city. 'In many places within easy reach of the city,' he wrote, 'the production of fruit,hops and vegetables rose from the position of insignificant and neglected branches of generalfarming almost to the status of independent industries'. 32He describes the intensification of fruitand vegetable growing in the suburbs of the city, the enclosing of ground, large expenditure onlabour, cultivation and manure gathered in the streets of the city. While there is little doubt thatearly-modern London's demand for horticultural products was both greater in aggregate and morediversified than it was in the medieval period, recent research has shown that medieval gardens wereboth numerous and important. 33Evidence from IPMs indicates that well over one half of manors had gardens attached to a capital

messuage. The primary purpose of the garden was to provide the household with fruit and veg-etables, but some gardens were large or productive enough to produce a marketable surplus. Suchgardens are often separately valued in inquisitions, where the average per annum profits, that is thesales of surplus after feeding the household, rarely exceed the modest sum of 3-4s. This figure isbacked up by evidence from the account rolls. Sales of garden fruits occur frequently in accountsalthough the sums involved are usually small. However, on some manors much larger sales are


observed and the strong impression is that specialised production of these horticultural consumablesbecomes more and more marked as one approaches the capital. 34Middlesex, Surrey, and east Berkshire manors with good transport links to London marketed

significant quantities of garden fruits, honey, nuts and verjuice (a liquid made from unripe grapes orapples and widely used in pickling and cooking). The manor of Esher in Surrey, for example, soldgarden fruit and 48 gallons of verjuice worth £2 6s 8d in 1308.35 The Westminster abbey manor ofKnightsbridge in the same period was selling quantities of honey, while Adam the gardener ofWindsor Castle garden sold 4 quarters 1 bushel of great nuts (probably walnuts) in 1305.36 Somemanors sent their gardeners into the city to sell direct to the populace, while others dealt withmerchants: Laleham in Middlesex sold £1 2s Od-worth of garden fruits to Roger Ie Fructor ofWyrardisbury in 1305-6.37The most striking examples come from gardens in or adjacent to the metropolis where market

gardening in some cases does indeed seem to have approached the level of 'independent industry'.The earldom of Lincoln manor of Holborn specialised in producing fruit, vegetables, and wine. In1295-6 the sergeant accounted for £9 from sales of apples, pears, and large nuts from the garden. Healso sold cherries, onions, leeks and garlic, beans, hemp, and vineplants, and 49 gallons of verjuice.The grape harvest was obviously better in 1304-5 when only eight gallons of verjuice was sold alongwith two casks of wine which fetched £5.38The bishops of Winchester had a large garden at Southwark which was selling substantial quanti-

ties of fruit from at least the first decades of the thirteenth century. The pipe roll for 1267 showsexpenditure of 19s on 43 apple trees and 100 pear trees to plant at Southwark.39 In the period 1290-1310 sales of garden produce (fruit, onions, leeks) averaged about 15sper annum, though occasion-ally were as high as 46s. There was also a steady income of 8s per annum from sales of nettles, andfrequently large sales of reeds and osiers.40 Similarly, the monks of Westminster abbey regularlyproduced fruit and vegetables in excess of their own needs which they sold.41There seems ample evidence for the existence of a class of professional gardeners who looked

after the large gardens of the magnates and bishops and supervised sale of surplus produce. Theywere well rewarded. The Holborn gardener was paid a substantial52s 2d per annum, equivalent tothe annual stipend of up to ten agricultural labourers, and the Southwark gardener received grain tothe value of 35s per annum.42 By early in the fourteenth century the London gardeners were arecognised, numerous, and organised class of traders. In 1345 the 'gardeners of the earls, barons,bishops, and citizens of London' presented a petition to the mayor asserting their rights 'to assemblein front of the church of St Austin at the side of the gate of St Paul's Churchyard and sell the gardenproduce of their masters and make their profit as heretofore'. There had been claims that thegardeners had disturbed priests in their holy office by their loud· clamour selling pulses, cherries,vegetables and other produce. It was eventually agreed that all the city gardeners should have, astheir place, the space between the south gate of the church of St Paul and the garden wall of theFriars Preachers at Baynard's Castle.43 All of this clearly demonstrates that commercial gardeningwas no novelty in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century London, but as with many other things merelyan extension and expansion of what had gone before.In contrast to horticultural products, fuel and building materials are not particularly perishable,

the main constraints on their commercial production being their bulky nature and resulting hightransport costs. Although coal was in use for both domestic and industrial purposes by the thirteenthcentury, wood remained by far the most important fuel in both town and country, and retained itsplace as the principal building material of the age. The demands of a major city like London werefocused and specialised with regard to wood as much as other commodities. It is thus unrealistic tosuppose that the city drew indiscriminately on an ever-expanding zone during its phases of growth inthe medieval and later periods. Medieval woodland was a prized and closely managed resource, anddifferent types of wood products might come from different types of wood. 44 Nevertheless, distancemust have imposed limits on the viability of commercial production and there is some evidence for afairly broad zone of commercial wood production at some 15 to 40 kilometers from London, withemphasis on the area to the west and south of the city, in Middlesex, Surrey, south Buckingham-shire, and accessible parts of Kent.


Manors in or adjacent to the Chiltern hills produced sizeable quantities of timber. These includethe Bishop of Winchester's manor of Ivinghoe which sold over £ll-worth of wood in 1306, and thede Lacy property at Holmer which in 1304 sent 2,750 logs to the estate's London headquarters atHolborn.45 The Westminster abbey manor of Pyrford in Surrey produced both faggots and timber.This wood was carried by carts to Laleham on the Thames and then onwards to Westminster byboat. Most of it was used by the monastic community but some of it also found its way onto themetropolitan market.46 Similarly the Winchester manor of Farnham in Surrey cut down 116 oaks in1309 for work on the bishop's properties at Southwark and Esher in Surrey, but in addition sold 24oak beams for £611s 8d and other wood products for over £4.47Commercial production of faggots for fuel was an important source of revenue for such manors as

Westerham and Orpington in Kent, Malden in Surrey and Acton, Edgware and Hampstead inMiddlesex. The bishop of London's manor of Acton sold 2,850 faggots for £218s 9d in 1301-2, andHampstead sold 4,000 at 32s a thousand in 1291 as well as providing a further 10,608 for the use ofthe monks at Westminster. 48

In the simplest models of agricultural location, dairying is seen as co-existing with horticulture inthe innermost zone, that being necessitated by the perishability of its products in pre-refrigerationtimes. However, it can be argued that this consideration in its strictest form applies only to milk,with butter and especially cheese being less perishable and more capable of being transported oversometimes quite long distances.In the early modern period Essex and Suffolk were major suppliers of cheese and butter to the

metropolis and it seems clear that this was a continuation of a long-established trade. Both com-modities were produced in large quantities in the medieval Essex marshlands, where substantialsheep flocks were kept. 49 The Westminster abbey manor of Fanton raised £5 8s Od from sale ofcheese in 1301-2 and a further £lls 4d from butter. 50Another major producer of dairy produce forthe market was the de Clare manor of Great Bardfield in north central Essex. In 1299-1300 thesubstantial sum of £14 lOs Odwas raised from sale of cheese and butter plus a little milk.51 If the milkwas consumed locally, where did the other produce go? It is possible that it may have been destinedto travel down the river Lea to London, but the urban populations of Cambridge and Colchestermight also have been the consumers. Westminster abbey brought large quantities of cheese over-land for its own consumption from manors such as Launton in Oxfordshire and the more distantPershore in Worcestershire. The latter was transported to Westminster via the manors of Islip inOxfordshire and Denham in Buckinghamshire. 52Cows and ewes were often 'put to farm', leased out for an annual sum to individuals who then

marketed or consumed the dairy produce and offspring of the animals. Spatial variations in theannual farm or lease price of a cow's milk and offspring may help us identify areas specialising indairy production. The bulk of farms of cows lie in the range 4-5s per animal, and it is interesting tonote that manors with farm prices significantly above this level include the Westminster abbeymanors of Knightsbridge, Ebury, and Hampstead, all close to the city. 53According to geographical modeis cattle rearing is an activity characteristic of the outer fringes of

a city's region with stock brought to the city on the hoof and fattened up just outside prior to selling.Long range movement of stock into London was certainly a feature of the early modern city whenthe city's meat trade was organised on a national basis; sheep were brought in from Gloucestershireand Northamptonshire and cattle were bred in Wales and north and west England, fattened in EastAnglia or the home counties and then sold to the city butchers.54 Fisher sees this as a developmentof the second half of the seventeenth century in response to considerable growth in the populationand its demand for meat.However, there is evidence which may point to an area of specialised cattle fattening around the

city in much earlier times. One would expect land producing hay and pasture to be very valuable inthe immediate environs of the city in response to the needs of livestock fattening and the fodderrequirements of London's substantial horse population. This is borne out by information collectedfrom IPMs between 1270 and 1339. The mean value per acre for meadow land across the study areain the period 1270-1339 is 21.8d. Figure 2 shows location of demesnes with meadow values at 36d


30

25

20

10

50 55 60

oI

20I

Km

40I

65

25

20

15

- 10

Figure 2. Meadow valued at 36d and above per acre per annum in Inquisitions Post Mortem 1270-1339

and above per acre, considerably above the mean. It can be seen that there is a small but distinctcluster of high meadow values close to the city. It is also interesting to see a band of high valuemeadow in the north-west part of the study area which might reflect the southern part of a midlandzone of specialised cattle rearing. 55Some London butchers seem to have had interests and property in areas outside the city in the

early fourteenth century. It is possible that these may have been used for fattening cattle, althoughdirect evidence is lacking. In 1305 four London butchers were disenfranchised because they residedbeyond the liberties of the city. From a later period there survive complaints from the butchers thatcertain of their number who lived outside the city were cornering the market and cutting out thelines of supply of their colleagues who lived within the walls. 56Evidence for long distance movement of cattle on the hoof into the city is to be found in the 1305

account for Holborn. In that year 14 oxen and 6 cows were brought down from Lindsey inLincolnshire to Holborn. Pasture and oats were bought to sustain them and a boy was hired to lookafter them until they were sold off for £11 7s 2d. 57 These particular animals were intended to supplythe lord's table and were only sold off because they proved surplus to requirements. However, this


movement of cattle from Lincolnshire to London is very interesting given the fact that at around thesame time Lincolnshire place names occur in names of London butchers and their suppliers. 58We can see similar examples of long-range movement of stock and produce in the case of

Westminster abbey. In 1293 16 oxen were brought from the manor of Pershore in Worcestershire tothe manor of Pyrford in Surrey and slaughtered there and the carcasses joined a large consignmentof wood, hay, and grain which was then sent overland to Ham and thence to Westminster abbey bywater.59 Such examples of movement of supplies within estates occur frequently in account rolls andare particularly interesting when the estate headquarters is in or adjacent to the city. They can shedlight on the contemporary transport network and the important issue of transport costs. Fur-thermore, provisioning these large households whether by market or non-market means was anintegral part of feeding the metropolis.Large animals would of course have to be reared outside the city and brought in to be sold, but

smaller food animals, pigs in particular, could be reared in and around the city. We know forexample that there was a piggery at Westminster abbey and in 1304 the treasurer sold off pigs worth£7 15s 6d. 60 Pigs and poultry were undoubtedly raised and marketed from small holdings which donot show up in our records; indeed, marketing of these animals has often been seen as the preserveof the smallholder. However, preliminary analysis of sales information from the account rolls hasshown that many demesnes including a cluster to the south and west of London marketed significantquantities of pigs, geese, and chickens and found it a lucrative business. The mean sale price of a pigwas twice that of an adult sheep and 2.5 times that of a calf, while the mean sale price of a goose wasover one-third that of a calf. 61It is clear that manorial demesnes sold produce aimed at a wide cross-section of consumers.

Poultry, which would have featured on the tables of the less well off (when they had meat at all),was sold by some 75 per cent of manors. Luxury items, including at this period rabbits, swans,venison, salmon, and pike, were the preserve of the rich, and were all marketed by smaller numbersof manors relatively close to the capital. More mundane types of fish undoubtedly were a significantitem on the tables of all classes and large numbers of manors had their own fish ponds. However,these primarily served household needs and the small number of sales of fish encountered consistmainly of eels from the manorial mill pond.62The vast majority of account rolls show some sales of beasts but it is not an easy matter to

separate those raising stock for the table from those selling off old working beasts or selling onyoung animals to be fattened elsewhere. It does however seem likely that when details of numbers,age of animal and price are statistically analysed certain places will emerge as having definiteinterests in raising stock for the London market. This type of analysis will form the next phase of theresearch.Turning to grain, the staple foodstuff for the bulk of the human population and, in the form of

oats, vital also for the sustenance of draught animals, a major city such as medieval London wouldnecessarily draw on a considerable area for its supplies. Despite the existence of areas of innovationand increased productivity overall gross yields of grain remained low, averaging perhaps eightbushels per acre for wheat. Surpluses available after seeding and other deductions naturally variedfrom manor to manor, but if four bushels per acre is postulated as an average marketable quantity(almost certainly an overestimate) then an area of 250,000 acres would have been required toprovide the estimated one million bushels of various grains which London may have consumed eachyear in the decades around 1300. This area is roughly equivalent to 1,200 demesnes of average size.Although bulky, grain is fairly easily transportable, particularly where there is ready access to

water traffic which could be some four to five times cheaper than overland carriage.63 Fisheremphasised the importance of the coastal trade in grain in the later sixteenth century, stressing inparticular the role of 'the great granary of Kent' in provisioning London, although the sources aresilent on the contribution of the inland counties at this period.64 Thirsk has also stressed the highlyadvanced nature of agriculture in the marshlands of north-east Kent in the seventeenth century, andshown how the area's prosperity was tied in with access to the metropolitan market.65 For the periodaround 1300, the importance of the east-west axis of the Thames is clear. Concentrations of manors


marketing particularly high proportions of their cereal crops appear to occur at middle distancefrom London in areas with access to riv.er or coast. Thus, in Oxfordshire the de Fortibus manor ofWhitchurch and the Merton manor of Cuxham - both within a day's journey of Henley, the regionalimportance of which was noted earlier - sold between 60 and 70 per cent of their wheat crops in the1290s, while the Kent manors of Cliffe, owned by Christchurch, Canterbury, and the archbishop'smanor of Maidstone beside the river Medway marketed 71.6 per cent and 68.5 per cent of theirwheat in 1298 and 1300 respectively. 66 The importance of grain production in Kent at this periodmay also be reflected in the IPM valuations of arable land which, in the north coastal and north-eastern areas of the county, are among the highest in England.67 Thus it seems likely that cost-distance rather than simple crow-fly distance holds one of the keys to understanding the commercialdevelopment of London's hinterland in the middle ages.

III

In conclusion then, how should we characterise the impact of medieval London upon its agrarianhinterland? Clearly, simplified models of the location of agricultural activity can only provide astarting point for a study of this kind; their geometric purity is fractured and distorted by manyfactors - variations in topography, differential costs of land and water transport, the existence ofrival centres of demand, above all, perhaps, the structure of landownership and the strategiespursued by the estates great and small which divided up the resources of medieval England. Suchcomplicating factors are not however unique to the medieval economy; studies of land use innineteenth- and twentieth-century economies based on market capitalism must equally pay heed tonatural, political, and other strictly non-economic factors.Nevertheless, the factors of metropolitan demand, distance, and transport cost can be seen to

have operated in the London hinterland of c. 1300. Market gardening close to the metropolis wasone clear response to the presence of concentrated urban demand. Commercial wood and grainproduction seem to have definite concentrations in areas with combinations of advantages, bothnatural and locational. Similarly we may be begin~ing to detect in outline a system of livestockproduction and movement which had definite links to the metropolitan market, as it was to have inlater centuries.Specialisation in this period was rarely absolute, in that most manors tried to retain a diversified

base; the market imperative was not the only one to which they had to respond. Nevertheless therelative importance of different activities, and the varying degrees of commercial involvement, canbe seen as specialised responses to market opportunities. Pursuing these lines of enquiry should leadto a clearer understanding of the medieval economy in its regional and national articulation, ratherthan as an aggregation of independent producing units.

NOTES

1 This paper introduces and presents some preliminary results from the 'Feeding The City' project based atthe Centre For Metropolitan History, Institute of Historical Research, London. The project is funded bythe Leverhulme Trust and is organised in partnership with the Queen's University of Belfast. We would liketo thank Derek Keene and Bruce Campbell for reading the text and making helpful suggestions, and OlwenMyhill for research assistance.

2 F. J. Fisher, 'The Development of the London Food Market, 1540-1640', Econ. Hist. Rev., V (1935), 46-64,57.

3 Ibid., 64. For a general discussion on the economic significance of urban growth: E. A. Wrigley,. 'Parasite orStimulus: The town in a Pre-industrial Economy' in E. A. Wrigley & Philip Abrams, eds., Towns inSocieties (1978), 295-309; and on London in particular the same author's 'A Simple Model of London'sImportance in Changing English Society and Economy 1650-1750' ibid., 215-243; see also P. Bairoch,Cities and Economic Development From the Dawn of History to the Present (1988).

4 D. Keene, 'A New Study of London Before the Great Fire' in Urban History Yearbook 1984 (Leicester,1984), 11-21; idem., Cheapside Before the Great Fire (1985).

5 Work on the population of the early modern city has recently been critically reviewed by V. Harding, 'The


Population of London, 1550-1700: a review of the published evidence', London Journal, 15 (1990),111-128.

6 Fisher, 'London Food Market', 64.7 C. Dyer, Standards of Living in the Later Middle Ages: Social Change in England c. 1200-1520 (Cambridge,1989), 134-5, 151-160, discusses dietary requirements; for fuel consumption see P. Brimblecomb, 'EarlyUrban Climate and Atmosphere' in A. R. Hall and H. K. Kenward, eds., Environmental Archaeology in anUrban Context, C.B.A. Research Report, 43 (1982), 18-22.

8 See for example the 1304-5 account for the manor of Holborn where 27s 5d wr:sspent buying roaches andeels to feed the lord's pike: Public Record Office (P.R.O.), DL 29/1/2.

9 B. Harvey, Westminster Abbey and its Esta~es in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1977), 144-5; G. Rosser,Medieval Westminster 1200-1540 (Oxford, 1989), 135-6.

10 Keene, 'A New Study', and Cheapside; idem., 'Medieval London and its Region', London Journal, 14(1989), 99-111; E. Rutledge, 'Immigration and Population Growth in Early Fourteenth Century Norwich:Evidence from the Tithing Roll' in Urban History Yearbook 1988 (Leicester, 1988),26-8.

11 B. M. S. Campbell, 'Agricultural Progress in Medieval England: Some Evidence from Eastern Norfolk',Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd series, XXXVI (1983), 26-46; idem., 'Towards an Agricultural Geography ofMedieval England', Agricultural Hist. Rev., 36 (1988), 87-98; idem., 'People and Land in the Middle Ages,1066-1500' in R. A. Dodgshon & R. A. Butlin, eds., An Historical Geography of England and Wales (2nd.edn., 1990), 69-121.

12 See B. M. S. Campbell, James A. Galloway, Margaret Murphy, 'Rural Land-use in the MetropolitanHinterland, 1270-1339: the Evidence of Inquisitiones Post Mortem', Agricultural Hist. Rev. (forthcoming).

13 J. H. Von Thiinen, The Isolated State: an English Edition, ed. P. Hall (Oxford, 1966);M. Chisholm, RuralSettlement and land use: an essay in location (1962); for an application of von Thiinen's theory to the middleages see F. Irsigler, 'L'Approvisionnement des Villes de L'Allemagne Occidentale Jusqu'au XVIe Siecle'in L'Approvisionnement de Villes de l'Europe Occidentale au Moyen Age et aux Temps Modernes, FlaranConference 5 (Auch 1985),117-44.

14 P. Spufford, Money and its Use in Medieval Europe (Cambridge, 1988), esp. chap. 11 'The place of moneyin the commercial revolution of the thirteenth century', 240-263.

15 P. D. A. Harvey, 'The Pipe Rolls and the Adoption of Demesne Farming in England', Econ. Hist. Rev.,2nd series, XXVII (1974), 345-58.

16 E. Miller & J. Hatcher, Medieval England: Rural Society and Economic Change 1086-1348 (1978), 162-4,201-4; J. L. Bolton, The-Medieval English Economy 1150-1500 (1980),88,96; Dyer, Standards of Living,109ff,presents evidence for peasant market activity; for patterns of consumption see idem., 'The Consumerand the Market in the Later Middle Ages', Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd series, XLII (1989), 305-27.

17 Canterbury Cathedral Library (C.C.L.), DCc/Merstham 15.18 C.C.L., DCc/Farningham 7; Northamptonshire Record Office, Fitzwilliam 2389; for a discussion of advan-tagium see R. H. Britnell, 'Advantagium Mercatoris: A Custom in Medieval English Trade', NottinghamMedieval Studies, XXIV (1980), 37-50.

19 C.C.L., DCc/East Farleigh 1; Lambeth Palace Library, ED 657; Essex Record Office (E.R.O.), D/DHuM87, D/Du 1364/2;P.R.O., SC6/847/11.

20 R. H. Britnell, 'The Proliferation of Markets in Medieval England', Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd series, XXXIV,(1981) 209-21; for a local study see D. Postles, 'Markets for Rural Produce in Oxfordshire, 1086-1350',Midland History, XII (1987), 14-25.

21 Small boats may have penetrated further up-river on occasion but the main commercial river traffic seems tohave stopped at Henley in the period under consideration. See R. H. C. Davis, 'The Ford, the River andthe City', Oxoniensia, XXXVIII (1973), 258-67, and A. Crossley, ed., The Victoria History of the County ofOxford, vol. 4, The City of Oxford (Oxford, 1979), 41.

22 Calendar of Wills proved and enrolled in the Court of Husting, London 1258-1688, Part 1, ed. R. R. Sharpe(1889),212; see also 177,284,414,538.

23 Merton Muniments (MM) 5815, printed in P. D. A. Harvey, Manorial Records of Cuxham, Oxfordshire,Oxfordshire Record Society, vol. 50 (1976), 299-315; MM 4474.

24 MM 5063, 5062.25 Westminster Abbey Muniments (WAM) 15318;Bodleian Library, MS. DD CH CH OR 96.26 J. Ashford, The History of the Borough of High Wycombe from its origins to 1800 (1960), 38-40; Bolton,

Medieval English Economy, 229.27 Cal. of Wills in Court of Husting, 1, 674.28 P.R.O., SC6/741/16.

14 JAMES A. GALLOWAY ~ND MARGARET MURPHY

29 P.R.O., SC6/740/8.30 Bedfordshire Record Office, Account Roll transcript (Book 160).31 P.R.O., EI01/556/2; prices from D. L. Farmer, 'Some Grain Price Movements in Thirteenth-CenturyEngland', Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd series, X (1957), 207-20.

32 Fisher, 'London Food Market', 52.33 For general surveys of this subject see J. Harvey, Medieval Gardens (1981); T. McLean, Medieval EnglishGardens (1981), esp. 197-248; more specialised treatment is to be found in Jardins et Vergers en EuropeOccidental Vllle-XVllle Siecles, Flaran Conference 9 (Auch, 1989).

34 'Feeding The City' databases of IPMs and demesne account rolls.35 Hampshire Record Office (H.R.O.), Eccles 2 159323.36 WAM 16382;P.R.O., SC6/752/5.37 WAM 27115.38 P.R.O., DL 29/1/1,1/2.39 H.R.O., Eccles 2 159308.40 H.R.O., Eccles 2 159286, 159313-19, 159321, 159323-24, 159448.41 WAM 19840, 19841.42 For rural wage rates see E. Miller & J. Hatcher, Medieval England, 49-53.43 Memorials of London and London Life in the XIII, XIV, & XV Centuries, ed. H. T. Riley (1868), 228-9.44 For medieval woodland management in general see Oliver Rackham, Trees and Woodland in the BritishLandscape (paperback edn., 1981), 66-95. For a recent local study see K. P. Witney, 'The WoodlandEconomy of Kent, 1066-1348', Agricultural Hist. Rev., 38 (1990), 20-39.

45 H.R.O., Eccles 2 159322;P.R.O., DL 29/1/2.46 WAM 27398,27399.47 H.R.O., Eccles 2 159325.48 Guildhall Library, MS. 25319/3;WAM 32404.49 H. C. Darby, The Domesday Geography of Eastern England (Cambridge, 1952),239-44. In Norden's daythe marshland hundreds of Essex produced cheeses 'wondred at for their massiuenes and thicknes': H.Ellis, ed., Historical and Chronological Description of the County of Essex by John Norden 1594, CamdenSociety, old ser. vol. 9 (1840), 8.

50 P.R.O., SC6/841/3.51 E.R.O., D/DHu M87.52 WAM 14783.53 WAM 16402, 26865, 32404.54 A. Everitt, 'The Marketing of Agricultural Produce' in J. Thirsk, ed., The Agrarian History of England andWales, vol. 4 (Cambridge, 1967), 466-589.

55 We would like to thank Mr John Power, Queen's University of Belfast, for his role in setting up thecomputer mapping for the project.

56 Riley, Memorials of London Life, 180; K.G.T. McDonnell, Medieval London Suburbs (1978), 59-61.57 P.R.O., DL 29/1/2.58 E.g. a John de Lindsey was among those butchers appointed to detect diseased meat for sale in Westcheapc. 1320:P. E. Jones, The Butchers of London (1976), 8.

59 WAM 27398.60 WAM 19841.61 For a preliminary analysis of marketing from the 'Feeding The City' database see M. Murphy & J. A.Galloway, 'Marketing Animals and Animal Products in London's Hinterland circa 1300' in Anthropozoolo-gica, Quatrieme Numero Special, (forthcoming).

62 For documentary and archaeological evidence for diet in the middle ages see Dyer, Standards of Living;idem., 'The Consumption of Fresh-Water Fish in Medieval England' in Medieval Fish, Fisheries andFishponds in England, ed. M. Aston, BAR, British Series 182 (1) (Oxford, 1988), 27-35; M. D. Bailey,'The Rabbit and the Medieval East Anglian Economy', Agricultural Hist. Rev., 36 (1988), 1-20; A. Grant,'Animal Resources' in G. Astill & A. Grant, eds., The Countryside of Medieval England (1988), 149-87;Philip L. Armitage, 'Studies on the Remains of Domestic Livestock from Roman, Medieval, and EarlyModern London: objectives and Methods' in Hall & Kenward, Environmental Archaeology, 94-106.

63 See Dyer, 'Consumer and the Market', 309.64 Fisher, 'London Food Market', 56.65 J. Thirsk, England's Agricultural Regions and Agrarian History 1500-1750 (1987), 45.66 Grain sales from the 'Feeding The City' databases.67 Ibid.

galloway,murphy.91.feeding london.pdf

Documents